175252

==== PAGE 1 ====

                                      19/00409/B                                     Page  1  of  4

PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Application No. : 19/00409/B Applicant : Mr And Mrs Michael Batey Proposal : Proposed kitchen extension to rear of property Site Address : 10 Somerset Road Douglas Isle of Man IM2 5AD

Planning Officer: Mr Paul Visigah Photo Taken : 14.05.2019 Site Visit : 14.05.2019 Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation

Recommendation

Recommended Decision:

Permitted Date of Recommendation: 21.05.2019 __

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.

Plans/Drawings/Information:

This approval relates to the drawing numbers JTM1903-P-00, JTM1903-P-01, JTM1903-P-02, JTM1903-P-03 date stamped and received 4 April 2019.

__

Interested Person Status - Additional Persons

None __

Officer’s Report

THE SITE 1.1 The application site is the residential curtilage of 10 Somerset Road, Douglas, a semi- detached three storey dwelling. The property is located on the south eastern corner of Somerset Road and has a back access situated on Woodbourne Road Lane.

1.2 The property is set within a residential area which is part of the Selborne Drive Conservation area in Douglas and sits southeast of the Nursery Garden on Albany Road. The

==== PAGE 2 ====

                                      19/00409/B                                     Page  2  of  4

neighbouring properties and plots on the northeast of the property are of a similar size, style and age.

THE PROPOSAL 2.1 The proposal comprises a kitchen extension to the rear of the property.

2.2 The single storey extension to the rear (southeast) facing elevation will have a flat roof with lantern accommodating the kitchen extension. The extension would measure 2.1m wide x 5.8m in length and 3.1m high (3.6 meters to the top of the roof lantern).

2.3 On the extension there would be a window within the gable facing North West to the rear boundary. The window will be white UPVC to match the existing windows on the rear of the building. This window will measure 1.4m wide and 1.7m high.

2.4 The flat roof kitchen will also have a roof lantern 1.2 metre by 2.8 metres.

PLANNING POLICY 3.1 The site lies within an area designated on the Douglas Local Plan Order (1998) as Predominantly Residential. As such, the General Policy 2 of the Strategic Plan 2016 is relevant:

3.2 General Policy 2 states that: "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:

(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 and

3.3 Environment Policy 35 is perhaps the crucial policy inconsideration in this application. This is hinged on the fact that the application area is situated within a Conservation area; The Selborne Drive Conservation Area.

Environment Policy 35 states that: "Within Conservation Areas, the Department will permit only development which would preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the Area, and will ensure that the special features contributing to the character and quality are protected against inappropriate development".

This echoes the provision of Planning Policy Statement 1/01, policy CA/2, which states: "When considering proposals for the possible development of any land or buildings which fall within the conservation area, the impact of such proposals upon the special character of the area, will be a material consideration when assessing the application.

3.4 The Residential Design Guide 2019 is another policy vital in the assessment of this application. Sections 3.1 and 4.2 are considered to be material to this applications assessment. Section 3.1.2 provides general guidance on issues that are likely to apply to all forms of extensions, and then more detailed additional advice in relation to different potential types of extensions.

3.1.3 The main design elements that should be considered include: o the relationship to the original part of the building - including materials, design and detailing (such as window materials and proportions); o the relationship with adjoining properties, including the building line, roof line, orientation, and the slope of the site; and

==== PAGE 3 ====

                                      19/00409/B                                     Page  3  of  4

o the pitch, shape and materials of the original roof; including the presence of original dormers and chimneys.

3.5 Section 4.2 assesses Single Storey Rear Extensions and states that: 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. Therefore, "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.

PLANNING HISTORY 3.1 The previous planning applications which are considered relevant in the assessment and determination of this application are:- Reference Number: 02/02216/B Status: Refused Proposal: Installation of replacement uPVC windows to front and rear elevations

Reference Number: 03/00787/B STATUS: Permitted Proposal: Replacement white timber sliding sash windows with integral arched heads to front elevation. Replacement white PVC casement windows to rear elevation

Reference Number: 15/01325/B STATUS: Permitted Proposal: Erection of a utility room extension to replace existing rear elevation workshop

REPRESENTATIONS Copies of representations received can be viewed on the government's website. This report contains summaries only. 5.1 The Douglas Borough Council have commented on this application and stated that they recommend that they have no objections to the application in the letter dated 26 April 2019.

5.2 Representation from the Department of Infrastructure (DOI) Highways Division confirms that there is no highways interest in the letter dated 1 May 2019.

5.3 Manx National Heritage has not commented on this application at the time of drafting this report, and so it is assumed that there are no objections to the application.

5.4 Manx Utilities Authority has not commented on this application at the time of drafting this report, and so it is assumed that there are no objections to the application.

ASSESSMENT

==== PAGE 4 ====

                                      19/00409/B                                     Page  4  of  4

6.1 There are considered two key considerations, firstly the potential impact upon neighbouring amenities (overlooking, loss of light, and/or overbearing impact upon outlooks) and secondly, the potential visual impact within the street scene.

6.2 The proposed works are to the rear of the property where it will not be visible from public views. It is well screened from public views, given its location to the rear of the property and the wall which surrounds the site. The size, position and scale of the proposal would be considered complimentary to the property whilst remaining subservient and finished to match the existing rear views of the dwelling. Moreover, the proposed works can be achieved without compromising the quality of the rear amenity space.

6.3 The neighbouring property most likely to be affected would be No. 11 to the south west of the site. This neighbouring property has also benefited from a single storey rear extension which would be approximately level with the applicant's proposal, although the height of these extensions is reduced, when compared with the proposed extension. Additionally, the shared boundary treatment consists of a 1.6 metre high wall, which would reduce the impact of the extension. Accordingly, given these reasons it is considered there would be no significant impacts to neighbouring amenities to warrant a refusal.

CONCLUSION 7.1 For these reasons the proposal is considered to comply with the relevant polices of the Strategic Plan and therefore recommended for approval.

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 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: 23.05.2019

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.