DEC Officer Report

Application No.: 19/00543/B Applicant: Ms Yvonne Donlan Proposal: Alterations, erection of extension with four roof lights, raised decking and flue to rear elevation Site Address: 29 Hildesley Road Douglas Isle Of Man IM2 5AX Principal Planner: Mr Chris Balmer Photo Taken: 03.07.2019 Site Visit: 03.07.2019 Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 27.08.2019 _________________________________________________________________

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.

• C 2. Prior to the use of the raised deck area the obscure glazing screens (1.8m high) to the eastern and western boundaries as shown on plan 252-01 dated stamped as having been received on 9th August 2019 shall be completed and retained thereafter. Reason: In the interest of residential amenities in terms of overlooking. Plans/Drawings/Information;

This approval relates to the submitted documents dated 13th May 2019 and drawings reference number 252-01 received on 9th August 2019.

_______________________________________________________________ Interested Person Status – Additional Persons

It is recommended that the following persons 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 not mentioned in Article 6(4):

31 Hildesley Road, Douglas - as they satisfy all of the requirements of paragraph 2 of the Department's Operational Policy on Interested Person Status (July 2018). _____________________________________________________________________________

Officer’s Report

1.0 SITE - 1.1 The site represents the existing residential curtilage of 29 Hildesley Road Douglas which is a mid-storey detached property located on the southern side of Hildesley. The property from the front elevation is a two storey; however, to the rear the proposal is two half storeys given the sloping topography of the area. The property has a garden to the front and to the rear.

2.0 PROPOSAL - 2.1 The application seeks approval for alterations, erection of extension with four roof lights, raised decking and flue to rear elevation.

- 3.0 PLANNING POLICY

3.1 The application site is designated as Predominantly Residential under the Douglas Local Plan Order 1998. The application site is within the Selborne Drive Conservation Area. - 3.2 The Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 contains two policies that are considered specifically material to the assessment of this current planning application: - 3.3 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."

3.4 Environmental Policy 35 states: "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."

3.5 Residential Design Guide - DEFA - March 2019

"4.7 ROOF TERRACES, BALCONIES, DECKING AND PATIOS

• 4.7.1 These can add a welcome amenity to a dwelling as long as the scale, design and materials complement the character of the property, whether it is traditional or modern.

• 4.7.2 In most instances, roof terraces on terraced or semi-detached properties are unlikely to be acceptable. For detached properties they can be acceptable where they are carefully designed to avoid unreasonable overlooking of neighbouring properties (including gardens). Large separation distances to neighbouring boundaries and habitable room windows will help to avoid such issues. Strategically placed solid screens/obscure glazed screens/slatted shutter screens may sometimes help where it is not otherwise possible to avoid overlooking. However, the use of such screens needs to be combined with careful design as such screening may result in a loss of light and/or be an overbearing and dominating feature to the outlook of the neighbouring properties/street scene. Balconies should not result in views into the rear windows of neighbouring properties at a distance of less than 20 metres.
• 4.7.3 Additional consideration should also be given to the potential visual impact upon the street scene and the individual dwelling. A projecting balcony can result in an alien and top heavy feature, particularly at first floor level or above. Thought should be given to minimising the visual impact of such an addition with regard to the size, projection and materials. Balconies should be designed to complement the proportions and character of the property and should be in line with windows on the original house.
• 4.7.4 Raised decking, terraces or patios that are higher than 0.3 metres require a specific planning approval. It is a requirement to ensure that neighbours' privacy is maintained by installing screening (fence, hedge etc.) that reaches the height of 1.8m above ground level. Screening will only be appropriate if it does not cause loss of light and/or be overbearing to an adjoining property. These areas should be designed sensibly in order to avoid dominance at the front boundary of a property. Large areas of decking are unlikely to be supported at the side or front of a property."

4.0 PLANNING HISTORY - 4.1 There are previous applications on this site; however, none are considered relevant in the determination of this application. - 4.2 The rear lean-to styled extension would essentially be an infill development between the rear kitchen and boundary wall with Nr 27. The extension would have a width of 1.4m, a depth of 2.8m and a maximum height of 4.8m. A pair of French doors would lead from the new extension to a proposed new raised decked area which has a width of 3.3m, a depth of - 3m and a floor height of between 1m and 1.7m. A 1.8m high obscure glazing would be installed to either side of the terrace.

- 5.0 REPRESENTATIONS

5.1 Highway Services comment the application has no highway implications (21.06.2019). - 5.2 Douglas Borough Council has no objection (31.05.2019). - 5.3 The owner/occupier of 31 Hildesley Road, Douglas has objected to the application which can be summarised as (10.06.2019); no objection to extension, but objects to rear raised decked area due to concerns of being overlooked into their rear garden from person standing on the decking.

• 5.3.1 Following these concerns amended plans where undertaken to reduce the width of the raised deck area and consequently moving it away from the boundary with Nr 31. Further the amended plans included a 1.8m high privacy screens along the side elevation facing towards Nr

• 31. However, the owner/occupier of 31 Hildesley Road, Douglas still objects to the proposal (18.08.2019) due to concerns of loss of light by the glass wall; also person from the stairs will still be able to look down into my garden and does not considered the proposal is justified.
• 6.0 ASSESSMENT

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

POTENTIAL VISUAL IMPACT UPON THE STREET SCENE

6.2 Visiting the area/site, given the works are to the rear of the dwelling none of the proposals are apparent from Hildesley Road. In terms of public views from the rear access lane, only the proposed extension would be partially apparent given heights of rear boundary walls and given the existing mature landscaping along the southern boundary of the site. Notwithstanding this the design, proportion, size and finishes of the works are considered in keeping and appropriate with the existing property and the amenities of the street scene; all complying with General Policy 2 and the Residential Design Guide. POTENTIAL IMPACTS UPON NEIGHBOURING PROPERTIES - 6.3 The neighbouring property most likely to be affect would be Nrs 27 & 31 Hildesley Road. The likely issues are potential overlooking from the raised terrace. There was an initial concern of this impact to these neighbouring properties and visiting the site these concerns were confirmed. - 6.4 It was noted in terms of the impact upon Nr 31 that there was existing boundary wall/fencing/landscaping which would have partially prevented full views from the raised decking into the neighbours garden/rear windows. However, this was not considered to be sufficient, given the height and positing of the initial decking area proposed. Accordingly the applicants reduced the width of the decked area, away from the boundary with Nr 31 (0.9m) and proposed a 1.8 obscure screen along the elevation facing towards Nr 31. It is considered this would prevent any significant overlooking (obscured glazing conditioned to any approval), while also ensure the screening does not have an overbearing impact upon the occupants of Nr 31, which would be reduced further given the existing vegetation along the boundary (east) of Nr 31. - 6.5 In terms of the impact upon Nr 27 there are similar impacts. There is currently a type of trellis currently above the boundary wall, which current enable views from the application site (existing external area outside kitchen door and from steps) into the rear yard of Nr 27. It was discussed with the applicants about possible screening i.e. glazed obscure glazing which has also been included on the amended plans. This would preserve privacy for the occupants of Nr 27; while also not have an overbearing impact, given only approximately 0.6m of the screen would be apparent from Nr 27's property. - 6.6 Overall, with an appropriately worded condition for additional screening it is considered the proposal would be acceptable. It is accepted that the raised decking area does have an increase potential for overlooking; albeit to an acceptable level. It is also noted that there is already a level of "mutual" overlooking between existing residential properties into their neighbours rear garden/yards, given the properties ground floor level is half/full storey above the ground level of the rear yards/gardens and therefore there are elevated views from rear windows. For these reasons, it is considered the proposal would not result in a significant degree of overlooking to the occupants of Nrs 27 & 31 Hildesley Road to warrant a refusal.

7.0 RECOMMENDATION

7.1 Overall, it is considered the proposal would comply with the relevant policies of the Isle Of Man Strategic Plan and the Residential Design Guide therefore it is recommended that the application be approved.

- 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 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 the Head of Development Management in accordance with the authority afforded to that Officer by the appropriate DEFA Delegation.

Decision Made : Permitted Date : 02.09.2019 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.