Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
19/00921/B Page 1 of 5
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 19/00921/B Applicant : Mr Ben Mason Proposal : Alterations, erection of side and rear extensions and installation of gateway to existing vehicular access and alteration and alteration to and erection of boundary treatment Site Address : Alverstone Glencrutchery Road Douglas Isle Of Man IM2 5HS
Planning Officer: Miss Lucy Kinrade Photo Taken :
Site Visit :
Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Permitted Date of Recommendation: 17.01.2020 __
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. The boundary wall hereby approved shall be finished in stone matching the existing stone wall and retained as such thereafter, unless details for an alternative stone material are submitted to and approved by the Department.
Reason: In the interest of visual amenity.
Plans/Drawings/Information;
This approval relates to drawing numbers C-P-333-01 Rev B, C-P-333-02 Rev B and Redland specification guide all date stamped and received 20/08/2019, Site photographs date stamped 14/08/2019, and drawing number C-P-333-03 Rev A date stamped and received 19/11/2019.
__
==== PAGE 2 ====
19/00921/B Page 2 of 5
Interested Person Status - Additional Persons
None __
Officer’s Report
1.0 THE APPLICATION SITE
1.1 The application site is the residential curtilage of Alverstone, Glencrutchery Road, Douglas an existing two storey semi-detached dwelling situated on the northern side of the road part way between the TT Grandstand and St Ninian's High School and opposite Noble's Park. The existing dwelling has a front elevation facing the main road, running along the side elevation is an existing flat roof conservatory and at the rear is a hipped roof conservatory. Within the rear garden is an existing detached outbuilding, a detached garage and a private driveway area access to which is achieved from a small service lane running along the side of the dwelling. This lane connects with Willaston estate although can only be accessed by vehicles part the way.
1.2 The existing dwelling is bound by a mix of treatments, a 1.8m high timber fence along the service lane, a 1.8m Manx stone wall wrapping the corner with the main road, and hedging along the main road.
1.3 Alverstone and its adjoining neighbour are fairly traditional in their appearance perhaps dating to the Arts and Crafts period, both are finished with rosemary tile roof, with prominent chimney stacks. Each has a small peaked dormer at the front and a projecting two storey gable. Each front door is topped within a flat roof canopy.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL
2.1 Full planning approval is sought for the removal of the existing white conservatory structures and their replacement with new masonry structures. At the side the proposal is for a 2.6m wide x 11m long lean-to extension installed with two windows and a rear access door, at the rear is proposed a flat roof extension 7.9m wide and projecting 3.9m from the rear elevation. The rear extension is to site 2.5m from the neighbours boundary and is to be finished with a parapet wall 3m to the tallest point. Both extensions are to be finished in render matching the main house, and new roof tiles matching those Redland Farmhouse Red tiles proposed for the main house.
2.2 The application also includes the removal of the existing boundary hedging and timber fencing and its replacement with a new 1.8m high stone wall to be tied in within and matching the existing Manx wall wrapping the corner junction. The existing driveway access is to be retained and fitted with a new sliding gate and the side pedestrian gate is also to remain unchanged.
3.0 PLANNING HISTORY
3.1 The site has been subject to two previous planning applications: o 98/00312/B - Conversion of detached garage into additional living accommodation and erection of new garage APPROVED o 04/01575/B - Conversion of garage into self-contained apartment - APPROVED
3.2 The 2004 application was approved with a condition restricting its use:
"C2. The proposed living accommodation may be occupied only in association with the existing dwelling Number 4 Glencrutchery Road."
==== PAGE 3 ====
19/00921/B Page 3 of 5
4.0 THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN
4.1 The site lies within an area zoned as Predominantly Residential on the Douglas Local Plan. This being the case, the scale and nature of the proposal is such that it falls to be assessed against parts (b), (c) and (g) of General Policy 2 and paragraph 8.12.1 of the Strategic Plan. Consideration shall also be given to the Residential Design Guide namely 4.2 and 6.1 which refer to guidance on rear extensions and boundary treatments.
4.2 Single Storey Rear Extension
"4.2.1 In relation to single storey extensions to the rear of the dwelling, generally the main issues relate to potential loss of light and/or overbearing impact upon the outlook of neighbouring properties. Extensions to terraced or semi-detached properties can have the potential for the greatest concern. With either type of property the depth (i.e. rear projection) of an extension and the position (near the shared boundary) are key in ensuring any such extension does not impinge on the amenities of neighbouring properties.
4.2.2 A "tunnelling effect" can be caused where windows are set back behind extensions projecting out either side. Ensuring an extension does not project too far from the rear of the house and/or setting an extension in from the boundary can help reduce problems of loss of daylight.
4.2.3 The acceptability of the length/depth of a single storey extension will depend on the positioning and size of neighbouring properties. For terraced houses and narrower semi- detached properties, single storey extensions are unlikely to be supported where they project more than 3 metres from the back of the house."
4.3 Boundary Treatments
"6.1.1 Boundary treatments, whether traditional or modern, contribute a great deal to the streetscape and character of an area. They define areas of private space and often make a positive contribution to the setting of the building. Poorly designed boundary treatments can undermine the quality of the built environment. Where new or altered boundary treatments are proposed, care should be taken to ensure that the proposed materials and detailing take a lead from the surroundings.
6.1.2 The suitability of the boundary treatment to the front of a property or facing the road should take account of the context of the area. For open plan estates it is normally better for there to be no walls or fences, with gardens being delineated through their use of low level plants. For more urban areas there may be a predominance of low garden walls with railings above. In rural areas, sod banks or hedging is more likely to be appropriate, unless there are stone walls present.
6.1.3 Unless circumstances dictate otherwise, generally no walls or fences should be higher than 1m where they face a highway. Boundary features to the side and rear boundaries can generally be higher (2m) without causing concerns. However, there are circumstances where there is a need for lower boundary heights in particular on corner plots, or if there is a public highway to the side and/or rear of the site."
5.0 REPRESENTATIONS
Copies of representations received can be viewed on the government's website. This report contains summaries only.
==== PAGE 4 ====
19/00921/B Page 4 of 5
5.1 DOI Highway Services - do not oppose 05/12/2019 5.2 Douglas Borough Council - no objections 30/08/2019 and 06/12/2019.
6.0 ASSESSMENT
6.1 In assessing the application the key issues are the extent to which the proposed developments (extensions and boundary wall) are considered acceptable in terms of its visual impact and effect on neighbouring living conditions.
Extensions
6.2 The proposed side extension would by slightly wider and longer than that which it is to replace, but would be finished in masonry and with a lean-to tiled to match the existing dwelling and would likely present a visual improvement on the current white UPVC flat roof conservatory.
6.3 The proposed flat roof rear extension is to project 3.9m and is to be 3m high, while the RDG states that extensions projecting beyond 3m are unlikely to be supported, the extension here is to sit 2.5m from the neighbours boundary and which accommodates a flexibility in the rear projection without resulting in a unacceptable overbearing impact, this is further mitigated by the adjoining neighbours having an open rear aspect on the adjacent bounding which joins Park Avenue Road.
6.4 There are limited public views to the rear of the property unless travelling along the service lane. It's evident from the drawings that the rear extension adopts a contemporary design style for the rear extension, this contrast to the traditional approach taken to the more prominent lean-to extension. While not strictly in accordance with the RDG it is considered that the rear extension is acceptable and does not result in any adverse harm to the existing dwelling, public view or the character of the streetscene.
Roof Tiles
6.5 The proposed roof tiles have been selected to match the existing roof tiles in terms of size and colour and their installation is expected to maintain the overall character and appearance of the existing dwelling and streetscene and considered to be acceptable.
Boundary Treatment
6.6 Glencrutchery Road comprises a mix of boundary treatments, the predominant treatment is exposed stone walls and which can be found along both sides of the road and in the immediate area of the site. These stone walls vary in heights between 1m and over 2m nearest St. Ninians. Along the cemetery the stone wall is topped with metal railings.
6.7 The proposed wall would seek to match with that existing section of Manx stone wall wrapping the roadside corner of the dwelling, its height and material finish would be complementary of the surrounding area and character of the streetscene and its installation would not result in any new highway safety issues given that it is to sit on the same positioning of the existing boundary treatment. A condition ensuring its finish in materials matching the existing stone wall as per the detail of the drawing is considered necessary for the avoidance of doubt.
7.0 CONCLUSION
7.1 The application is considered to meet the tests of GP2 and the Residential Design Guide and to have an acceptable visual impact and amenity impact on the existing dwelling, surrounding area and neighbours and therefore is recommended for approval.
==== PAGE 5 ====
19/00921/B Page 5 of 5
8.0 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; (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 Planning Committee 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: 21.01.2020
Determining officer
Signed : S CORLETT Sarah Corlett
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