Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
17/00037/B Page 1 of 5
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 17/00037/B Applicant : Mr John Batty Proposal : Alterations and erection of a rear two storey extension Site Address : 110 Castlemona Avenue Douglas Isle of Man IM2 4EF
Planning Officer: Mr Owen Gore Photo Taken : 30.10.2018 Site Visit : 30.10.2018 Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Permitted Date of Recommendation: 30.10.2018 __
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.
C 2. All external facing and roofing materials to be used in the development, hereby approved, shall match those of the existing building where appropriate, in respect of their type, colour and finish.
Reason: In the interests of the character and appearance of the site and surrounding area in accordance with General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.
C 3. Prior to the occupation of the extension, hereby approved, the bike storage area, shall be built in accordance with the drawing No.03 Rev B - 'Floor & Site Plans, Elevation & Section - As Proposed', date-stamped as having been received 11 September 2018. Thereafter the bike storage area shall only be used for secure bicycle and/or motorcycling parking and at all times be made available for the residents of 110 Castlemona Avenue.
Reason: To ensure that adequate off-street parking is provided for the application site, in accordance with General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.
Plans/Drawings/Information:
This planning permission relates to the following plans and documents: -
Dwg No.03 Rev B - Floor & Site Plans, Elevation & Section - As Proposed
==== PAGE 2 ====
17/00037/B Page 2 of 5
Date-stamped as having been received 11 September 2018
Location Plan Dwg No.02 - Floor & Site Plans, Elevation & Photographs - As Existing Date-stamped as having been received 13 January 2017 __
Interested Person Status - Additional Persons
None __
Officer’s Report
THE SITE 1.1 The application site is a large terrace property, currently used as a House of Multiple Occupancy; the site sits at the end of Castle Mona Avenue, which is a long street that runs parallel with the Douglas Central Promenade.
1.2 At the rear of the site is a wide alley serving the back of the town houses as well as the rear of properties fronting the Promenade. There is a narrow alley next to the Spectrum Apartments providing access to the Promenade which is a very short walk from the site to the south east.
THE PROPOSAL 2.1 The proposal is to demolish a garage and out buildings and for alterations and erection of a two storey, rear extension to provide additional living accommodation.
2.2 The proposed extension will house a lounge, kitchen and utility/storage space on the lower ground floor, which is occupied as a separate flat used for managers accommodation. On the ground floor the extension will house a kitchen and utility/storage space; as a result of the new kitchen being located in the proposed extension, an additional bedroom has been shown where the existing kitchen is located.
2.3 The Certificate of Lawful Use ref: - 18/00065/LAW, to make lawful the use of the property as a House in Multiple Occupancy, specified the managers accommodation as a separate entity and the HMO having a total of 6 bedrooms. The proposal will therefore increase this number to 7 bedrooms.
PLANNING POLICY 3.1 The site is shown on the Douglas Local Plan Order 1998 map No.2 as being within the local plan area and the property is designated within an Area of Predominantly Residential Use. The site is not within a Conservation Area; however the properties to the east of the site are within the Douglas Promenades Conservation Area, the boundary of which is adjacent to the rear of the site.
3.2 General Policy 2 applies to proposals that are in accordance with the land-use zoning and states that development will normally be permitted where it: -
(b) respects the site and surroundings in terms of the siting, layout, scale, form, design and landscaping of buildings and the spaces 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;
==== PAGE 3 ====
17/00037/B Page 3 of 5
3.3 Within chapter 8 of the Strategic Plan, paragraph 8.12.1, in relation to extensions to Dwellings in built up areas or sites designated for residential use, it states 'As a general policy, in built up areas not controlled by Conservation Area or Registered Building policies, there will be a general presumption in favour of extensions to existing property where such extensions would not have an adverse impact on either adjacent property or the surrounding area in general'.
PLANNING HISTORY 4.1 The previous Certificate of Lawful Use ref: - 18/00065/LAW to make lawful the use of the property as a House in Multiple Occupancy and the planning permission 05/01753/B for the 'Demolition of existing and rebuilding of rear utility and bathroom outlets' are both considered to be specifically material in the assessment of the current application.
REPRESENTATIONS Copies of representations received can be viewed on the government's website. This report contains summaries only.
5.1 Representation from the Department of Infrastructure (DOI) Highways Division confirms that they oppose in the comments dated 10 February 2017 and 10 August 2018.
The latest comments state: -
'Following the previous highway response dated 10/02/17 opposing the application, the applicant has submitted amended plans and additional information.
Highway Services does not agree with the applicant's comments in relation to the removal of the existing garage as part of the development. Whist it was acknowledged in the previous highway response that it may be difficult to use the garage to park a car, it would still be possible to securely park motorcycles and bicycles. Even if the current residents do not wish to use the garage to park cycles and motorcycles future residents may want to do so.
...As Highway Services previously advised, the removal of the garage parking facility without the replacement of a similar facility would increase the parking demand on the highway and restrict the use of motorcycles and bicycles.
Highway Services recommends refusal of this application as it conflicts with GP 2(h) of 'The Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016''
5.2 Douglas Borough Council has commented on this application both previously at the time of the original submission and following a more recent re-consultation. Both sets of comments stated that they do not object in the letters dated 30 January 2017 and 17 August 2018.
ASSESSMENT Character and appearance 6.1 Due to the location of the proposed extension at the rear of the property it is unlikely to be seen from any of the main public thoroughfares. The proposal would not unacceptably harm the characteristics of the existing building or the character of its surroundings.
Impact on neighbours 6.2 The neighbouring property at No. 108 Castlemona Avenue is also a traditional three storey town house with basement forming part of the frontage to the north east end of Castlemona Avenue to the south west of the application site.
6.3 Planning permission ref: - 14/01357/B for the erection of a three storey extension to rear elevation was granted but doesn't appear to have been built; however they do have an existing
==== PAGE 4 ====
17/00037/B Page 4 of 5
two storey rear extension that mirrors the existing rear extension of the application site and there are no windows that are likely to be overshadowed by the proposal. The proposal is therefore unlikely to have any significant impact on this property.
6.4 The proposal includes north facing windows; the existing rear extension includes a north facing, side window that faces the side elevation neighbour's rear extension, which also includes two south facing side windows, although these both appear to be obscure glazed. The proposed windows will overlook the proposed single storey aspect of the proposal, as well as the rear yard area of the neighbouring property, which appears to be mostly taken up by a garage. Although technically amenity space, the neighbours rear yard is dominated by an existing structure and already heavily overlooked; therefore, on balance, the individual harm isn't considered significant to warrant refusal on this basis.
6.5 To the rear of the application site is No. 1 Castle Terrace and Castlemere Apartments at 2 - 3 Castle Terrace, the rears of which faces the back of the site on the other side of the rear alley. The rear of the extension and rear of No.1, 2 & 3 Castle Terrace would face each other across the rear lane. The elevation to elevation distance would be approx. 4 metres. The windows on the rears of Castlemere Apartments at 2 & 3 Castle Terrace have all been blocked up with masonry and rendered over, although they are still visible. In the case of No.1, there would be no overlooking as the rear windows of this neighbouring property are obscured and don't appear to be serving habitable rooms.
6.6 On Balance, the proposed development would not result in a significant adverse impact upon the living conditions of neighbouring residents. In this respect, the proposal complies with GP2.
Parking and highway safety 6.7 The DoI highways division have objected on the basis that there is an existing garage that will be removed as a result of this proposal; the garage is only 2.5m wide and is accessed via a narrow lane. They have stated that 'It is accepted that it may be difficult to use the garage to park a car however it would be possible to securely park motorcycles and bicycles'. The comments continue to state 'Removal of this parking facility without replacement of a similar facility will increase parking demand on the highway and restrict the use of motorcycles and bicycles'.
6.8 During the previous Certificate of Lawful Use application ref: - 18/00065/LAW to make lawful the use of the property as a House in Multiple Occupancy, it was accepted that the lower ground floor is occupied as a separate flat used for managers accommodation and that this accommodation, including the rear yard, outbuildings and garage were considered to be a separate entity from the rest of the accommodation.
6.9 Therefore to address the loss of this facility, a bike store has been incorporated into the scheme, accessed from the rear lane; there will also be some space available in the rear yard for the lower ground manager's accommodation. No further comments have been received from highway services.
CONCLUSION 7.1 On balance, the proposal is considered acceptable in accordance with the designation within the Local Area Plan and the appropriate policies within the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.
INTERESTED PERSON STATUS
8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013 Article 6(4), the following persons are automatically interested persons: (a) The applicant, or if there is one, the applicant's agent;
==== PAGE 5 ====
17/00037/B Page 5 of 5
(b) The owner and the occupier of any land that is the subject of the application or any other person in whose interest the land becomes vested; (c) Any Government Department that has made written submissions relating to planning considerations with respect to the application that the Department considers material (d) Highway Services Division of Department of Infrastructure and (e) The local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated.
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 in Article 6(4) 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.
Decision Made : Permitted
Date: 31.10.2018
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