DEC Officer Report

Application No.: 20/00179/B Applicant: Mr Simon Garrood Proposal: Erection of a raised and covered decked area (partial retrospective) Site Address: 19 Ormly Avenue Ramsey Isle Of Man IM8 3LF Principal Planner: Mr Chris Balmer Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation Recommended Decision: Refused Date of Recommendation: 04.05.2020 _________________________________________________________________ R : Reasons for Refusal O : Notes attached to reasons Reasons for Refusal - R 1. The raised deck given its height, width, design, finish and proximity to the east boundary (adjoining Plot 106 Royal Park) would be obtrusive and have a significant adverse impact upon the future occupants of this dwelling (Plot 106 Royal Park) by having an overbearing impact upon their outlooks, from their property and rear garden contrary to General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 and the Residential Design Guidance 2019. - R 2. The raised deck would introduce unobstructed views from the southeast section of the deck and from the external staircase towards the rear garden of Plot 105, resulting in in an adverse impact through overlooking resulting in loss of privacy contrary to General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 and the Residential Design Guidance 2019. _______________________________________________________________

Interested Person Status – Additional Persons

None _____________________________________________________________________________

Officer’s Report

1.0 SITE - 1.1 The application site represents the curtilage of an existing property 19 Ormly Avenue, Ramsey. The dwelling is a single storey with dormer accommodation dwelling, with gardens to the front and the rear of the property. The dwelling is located on eastern side of Ormly Avenue.

1.2 To the rear of the site is a housing development (Royal Park Phase 2) which is currently under construction. Plots 105 - 106 Royal Park will be located to the rear of the application site boundary, which will be two storey detached properties.

2.0 PLANNING POLICIES - 2.1 In terms of local plan policy, the application site is within an area recognised as being within predominantly residential use under the Ramsey Local Plan. The site is not within a Conservation Area. - 2.2 Due to the zoning of the site and the proposed works the following policies are relevant in the determination of the application:- - 2.3 General Policy 2 states: "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:

• (a) is in accordance with the design brief in the Area Plan where there is such a brief;
• (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;
• (d) does not adversely affect the protected wildlife or locally important habitats on the site or adjacent land, including water courses;
• (e) does not affect adversely public views of the sea;
• (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 unacceptable 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;
• (l) is not on contaminated land or subject to unreasonable risk of erosion or flooding;
• (m) takes account of community and personal safety and security in the design of buildings and the spaces around them; and
• (n) is designed having due regard to best practice in reducing energy consumption."

2.4 Residential Design Guidance 2019 contains a section, 4.1 on "Roof Terraces, Balconies, Decking and Patios" and section 7.0 "Impact on Neighbouring Properties".

- 3.0 PLANNING HISTORY

3.1 There are no previous planning applications which are considered relevant in the assessment and determination of this application. - 4.0 PROPOSAL

4.1 The application seeks approval for the erection of a raised and covered decked area (partial retrospective). The proposal would be sited adjacent to the rear boundary of the site (east) having a width of 4m, a depth of 2.5m and a maximum height of 4.1m. The proposal is constructed and finished in timber. The raised deck floor level would be 1.8m above the ground level of the garden. The rear elevation of the raised deck would have a solid timber cladding to prevent ay views towards Plot 106 Royal Park. The front elevation (west) would have views towards the application garden/dwelling. The raised deck is orientated southwesterly direction.

- 5.0 REPRESENTATIONS

5.1 Highway Services comment there are no highway implications (10.03.2020).

5.2 Ramsey Commissioners do not object (23.03.2020). - 6.0 ASSESSMENT

6.1 The key issues relate to the potential visual impact upon the street scene and potential impact upon neighbouring amenities.

6.2 The proposed raised deck would not be especially apparent from public views, given its location to the rear of the site and given other properties along Ormly Avenue blocking any views. The same situation would likely occur from the new Royal Park Estate (under construction), with properties blocking views of the raised deck. If such views are available from either location, they are likely to be fleeting and certainly not prominent views. Accordingly, while the proposal is fairly unique in terms of its appearance, it is not considered it would result in in a significant visual impact upon the street scenes to warrant a refusal. It is considered the proposal would comply with General Policy 2.

6.3 The main issue with the application is the potential impact upon neighbour amenities in this case the future occupants of Plots 105 and 106. It is considered Plot 106 is likely to be most affected namely through overbearing impacts and a lesser extent of loss of light. The proposal would introduce a 4m wide solid fence at a height of 4.1m which would run parallel to the eastern boundary of the site and adjacent to the rear garden of Plot 106. It is considered such a feature would be obtrusive and have a significant adverse impact upon the future occupants of this dwelling by having an overbearing impact upon their outlooks, from their property and rear garden. There would be some loss of light during late afternoon/evening periods; however, arguable not to an extent to warrant a refusal. - 6.4 In relation to the impact upon future occupants of Plot 105, the concern is through the potential overlooking and/or perceived overlooking from the raised decked area into their rear garden. From the raised deck there would be unobstructed views from the southeast section of the deck and from the external staircase, both of which face towards the garden of Plot 105. It is considered for these reasons and proximity on the eastern boundary of the site and neighbouring garden, this would result in in an adverse impact through overlooking resulting in loss of privacy. - 6.5 Accordingly, it is considered the proposal would contravene General Policy 2.

- 7.0 RECOMMENDATION

7.1 Overall, it is considered the proposal would contravene General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 and the Residential Design Guidance 2019 for the reasons stated previously within this report. It is recommended that the application be refused. - 8.0 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.

Decision Made : Refused Date: 04.05.2020 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 onlineservices/customers and archive records.