DEC Officer Report

Application No.: 23/01123/B Applicant: Mr & Mrs Mark Beaumont Proposal: Demolition of existing rear porch and erection of a single storey rear extension Site Address: 55 Bemahague Avenue Onchan Isle Of Man IM3 4AP Planning Officer: Mr Hamish Laird Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 15.11.2023

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 General Policy 2 and Environment Policy 22 iii) of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016; and, the advice contained in the Isle of Man Residential Design Guide 2021.

Plans/Drawings/Information;

This approval relates to the documents and plan date stamped and received 27 September, 2023. _____________________________________________________________

Interested Person Status – Additional Persons

It is recommended that the owners/occupiers of the following properties should be given Interested Person Status as they are considered to have sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings and are mentioned in Article 4(2):

53 Bemahague Avenue, Onchan, Isle of Man, IM3 4AP

as they satisfy all of the requirements of paragraph 2 of the Department's Operational Policy on Interested Person Status (2021). _____________________________________________________________________________

Officer’s Report THE APPLICATION SITE

1.1 The application site is the residential curtilage of 55 Bemahague Avenue, Onchan which is a two storey end of terraced property with a room within the roofspace. The property is within a terrace of three which are situated to the end of the Bemahague Avenue cul-de-sac. - 1.2 To the end of the Bemahague Avenue cul-de-sac are 22 garages, it is not clear whether the occupants of the garages are from Bemahague Avenue or the surrounding properties. - 1.3 Due to the location of the property the rear and side is visible from the Lhondoo Close culde-sac of which due to the topography of the site as a whole the side garden is at a slightly lower topography. THE PROPOSAL

2.1 Following the demolition of the existing rear porch, the current planning application seeks approval to erect a single storey, full-width rear extension, housed under a mono-pitch roof measuring approx. 4.68m wide x 3.65m deep x 2.63m high to the eaves and 3.87m high to the ridge where the roof would join the existing rear house wall just under the first floor rear window cills. It is proposed to be finished with rendered walls to match the dwelling and matching Double Roman roof tiles. It would have 2 No. rooflights inserted in the roof-slope. It would house a new dining room with window in the rear elevation facing out onto the rear garden area; and, an entrance porch/utility room, and WC with a pedestrian door into the utility room providing access from outside in the side garden area. Both the WC and utility area would have one window each, which for the WC, would be obscure glazed. PLANNING HISTORY - 3.1 There are two previous application affecting the site which are of relevance to the assessment of this application.

3.2 PA 22/00268/B - sought approval to erect a wedge shaped two storey extension to the side elevation and a single storey extension to the rear with balcony above. The proposed extension was to have a double pitched roof and far roof to the rear two storey part of the proposal. - 3.3 The application was refused on 21/6/22 for the following reason: "By reason of the inappropriate roofing design, the proposed extension is considered to have an unacceptable visual impact on the existing dwelling contrary to General Policy 2 (b and c) and contrary to those principles set out in section 4 of the Residential Design Guidance 2021." - 3.4 No appeal was received. - 3.5 PA21/01268/B sought permission for the erection of a front and rear extension involving the erection of a wedge shaped two storey flat roofed extension to the side elevation and a single storey extension to the rear with balcony above. The proposed two storey flat roof would measure approximately 5.4m high. - 3.6 This application was refused on 28/1/22, for the following reasoning:

• "By reason of the size, flat roof design and inappropriate windows the proposed extension is considered to have an unacceptable visual impact on the existing dwelling contrary to General Policy 2 (b and c) and contrary to those principles set out in section 4 of the Residential Design Guidance 2021."
• 3.7 No appeal was received PLANNING POLICY

4.1 The site lies within an area zoned as Predominantly Residential on the Area Plan for the East, Map 6 - Onchan. The property is not within a Conservation Area and it is unsure from the Flood Risk Management mapping whether the side garden of the property is within a Surface Water - Low Likelihood, Flood Risk Zone.

4.2 Given the nature of the residential property and the land designation paragraph 8.12.1 and General Policy 2 from the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 are most relevant to its assessment which set out the general standards towards acceptable development. - 4.3 The recently released Residential Design Guidance 2021 is also a material consideration particularly those parts in respect of good neighbourliness and overlooking. - 4.4 Furthermore, consideration should also be given to Community Policies 7 and 11 in respect of reducing outbreak of fire and preventing criminal activity and Infrastructure Policy 5 in respect of water conservation. REPRESENTATIONS

5.1 The following representations can be found in full online;

5.2 Highway Services has considered the proposal and has advised that it has no highway interest in the application. (6.10.23) - 5.3 Onchan District Commissioners have considered the proposal and state Refusal on the basis of "Does not comply with the Residential Design Guide 2021, Section 4.6.5." The layout and density of building design and visual appearance." (17.10.23) - 5.4 One letter of representation has been received from the owner of the middle house in this terrace of three, at 53 Bemahague Avenue, Onchan. The writer raises objections to the proposed development, commenting:

"I wish to object to the application on grounds of: Height and proximity to my home/ loss of light.

The houses are short (from front to back) and narrow (my garden is 15 foot square) and the construction would run adjacent to my property from 13 foot high to around 9 foot (at its lowest, higher than the existing porch). Effectively the length of my garden and virtually on the border between the houses. This causes loss of light.

The planning does not take into account the orientation of my doors and windows. My only rear ground floor window would only be 2 feet away from the construction and therefore it would be in view at pretty much all angles (also from around a third of the living room). Afternoon light, not only into the kitchen but also the living room beyond would also consequently be reduced.

Should planning be accepted this would also set a precedent for any future application for my neighbours on the other side for a similar construction."

ASSESSMENT

6.1 The main issues to consider in the assessment of this planning application are:

• - character and appearance (GP2, b,c)
• - impact on neighing amenity (GP2, g)
• - other matters (RDG, CP7, 11 & IP5)

- 6.2 CHARACTER AND APPEARANCE

• 6.2.1 There is a general presumption in favour of extensions or alterations to existing properties as per Paragraph 8.12.1 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan, where such works would not have an adverse impact on either adjacent properties or the surrounding area in general.
• 6.2.2 The previously refused application PA21/01268/B was refused for two reasons, firstly the inconsistency with the windows within the proposal and secondly the proposed flat roof. When looking at extensions in general there is a presumption that the proportions of a proposed extension will follow the main dwelling. Whilst this is the case, the proposal here has introduced three different roof types, firstly a smaller pitched roof, then secondly a pitched roof which follows the lines of the rear slope of the dwelling and then a flat roof to the rear part of the two storey extension.
• 6.2.3 The subsequent PA22/00268/B application proposed a roof that was inconsistent with the existing dwelling and which would have added an inappropriate form of design to the dwelling which would have had an adverse impact on the existing dwelling as a whole and the overall streetscene, especially when viewed from such a public vantage point that the proposed extension would be sited, due to its location within the overall streetscene. Whilst "modern" design approaches are accepted they should be considered holistically with the original/main property and it's setting within the overall streetscene to avoid awkward jarring of materials and forms.
• 6.2.4 The PA22/00268/B application was refused because its size, flat roof design and inappropriate windows would have resulted in the proposed extension having an unacceptable visual impact on the existing dwelling contrary to General Policy 2 (b and c) and contrary to those principles set out in section 4 of the Residential Design Guidance 2021.
• 6.2.5 It is especially important when assessing the suitability of a proposed extension on a property as when you are altering or extending a building in order to add additional living accommodation, the overall character and form of the main property and the overall streetscene is unaffected. General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan indicates that generally house extensions within areas designed for development will be permitted providing that they reflect and enhance the appearance of the existing property, adjoining properties and their setting in terms of scale, design and materials.
• 6.2.6 With the current application, the proposal is for a single storey, full width, rear extension that would project out from the rear wall of this end terraced dwelling by approx. 3.65m deep x 2.63m high to the eaves and 3.87m high to the ridge where the roof would join the existing rear house wall just under the first floor rear window cills. It would be screened from views from the front by the existing dwelling, and the other two attached dwellings in this terrace of three units. In this regard it would be sited on the rear of elevation of the dwelling facing west, and would be sited to the north of the attached dwelling at No. 53, which is located to the south of the application property. The objections received from both the Onchan Commissioners and the neighbour at No. 53 Bemahague Avenue are both noted. The advice contained within the Residential Design Guide 2021, particularly at Section 4.6.5., is noted, this leads onto the impact on neighbours amenities.

• Neighbouring amenity
• 6.2.7 In terms of the impact on the residential amenities of the occupants of the neighbouring dwelling at No. 53, it is noted that the proposed single storey rear extension is relatively small in scale and is confined to the rear of the property. It has a mono-pitch roof which would descend to a lower level the further it projects out from the rear wall of the main house. With regard to the impact on the amenities of the occupants of this neighbouring property, the proposed roof would be higher than the existing fence line although with the orientation of the extension facing West, and it being sited to the north of No. 53, it is considered that there would be little or no impact on direct sunlight (as the sun sets) into the neighbouring garden/rear windows of No. 53 by the proposals.
• 6.2.8 It is considered that the proposed extension has been designed to reflect the parameters given of the site and to overcome the reasons for refusal as per the two previous PA21/01268/B and PA22/00268/B, applications, and on this occasion the proposal represents an appropriate extension for the property, the residential amenities of the occupants of No. 53, and the overall streetscene. OTHER MATTERS
• 6.2.9. The proposed works are an extension to an already existing dwelling, as such the proposal is not expected to create any changes or new issues in respect of criminal activity or fire risk. Whilst increasing the surface area of the dwelling, any water run-off would be dealt with as per the existing arrangement of the main dwelling. The proposed extension should not increase water usage of the dwelling and therefore there are no new issues in this regard.
• 6.2.10 With regard to this proposal setting a precedent for development elsewhere, such as at No. 51 Bemhague Avenue, as raised by the occupants of No. 53, DEFA Planning considers each application it receives on its merits as n no two sites are the same. Any such proposals are determined in accordance with the provisions of the Strategic Plan, Residential Design Guidance, other relevant policy documents; plus, any other materials considerations. The approval of one application does not necessarily mean that similar applications elsewhere would also be approved. CONCLUSION

• 7.1.1 It is considered that the proposal would have an acceptable impact on the appearance of the existing dwelling, the surrounding streetscene; and, on the amenities of occupants of the neighbouring attached dwelling at No. 53 Bemahague Avenue. No other nearby neighbouring properties would be affected as a result of the development. The proposal represents an appropriate form of development which would accord with the provisions of General Policy 2 (b and c) and also accords with the design principles of Section 4 of the Residential Design Guide

1. The application is recommended for approval. 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 the Head of Development Management 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 : 16.11.2023 Determining officer

Signed : S BUTLER Stephen Butler Head of Development Management

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.