Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
24/91063/B Page 1 of 8
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 24/91063/B Applicant : Mr James Brookman Proposal : Single storey side extension to create garage, loft conversion and internal layout changes. External remodelling and associated landscaping Site Address : 15 Third Avenue Douglas Isle Of Man IM2 6AL
Planning Officer: Paul Visigah Photo Taken : 12.09.2023 Site Visit : 12.09.2023 Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Permitted Date of Recommendation: 03.04.2025 __
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 26 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.
C 2. Within three months to the installation of external finishes and materials, details of all external finishes, including the manufacturer's details, specification and colour of all the materials/roof/wall/windows/doors/garage doors/rainwater goods to be used in the external finish for the approved development shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Department.
The development shall not be carried out unless in accordance with the approved details and retained thereafter.
Reason: To ensure that the development is carried out to the highest standards of materials, in the interests of the appearance of the development and the visual amenities of the area.
C 3. Notwithstanding the details that have been submitted, a detailed landscaping plan shall be submitted to the Department in writing to be agreed within three months of this approval. The landscape plan shall include details of hard surfacing materials, planting plans (at a scale not less than 1:100), written specification of planting and cultivation works to be undertaken and schedules of plants, noting species, plant sizes and proposed numbers / densities and a programme for the implementation, completion and subsequent management of the proposed landscaping.
==== PAGE 2 ====
24/91063/B Page 2 of 8
Any proposed planting should be in accordance with details contained within a Planting Palette provided as part of the plan.
The hard surfacing details shall include details of planters and samples showing the texture and colour of the materials to be used. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme and shall be retained as such thereafter.
Reason: To ensure that the development achieves a high standard of design, layout and amenity and makes provision for hard and soft landscaping which contributes to the creation of a high-quality environment.
C 4. The garage, car parking, and manoeuvring areas shall be provided strictly in accordance with the details shown on Drawing No. 223-P9002 Rev 05. These areas shall not be used for any purpose other than for parking of vehicles associated with the development and shall remain free of obstruction for such use at all times.
Reason: In the interest of Highway Safety.
This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason. The proposal is considered acceptable as it complies with General Policy 2, Strategic Policies 1, 2, 3(b), and 5, Environment Policy 42, Transport Policies 6 and 7 of the IOM Strategic Plan 2016, and the principles of the Residential Design Guidance 2021. The development does not harm the use or enjoyment of the application site, neighbouring properties, or the character of the area, whilst ensuring a positive visual impact. Furthermore, the scheme meets parking and highway safety requirements, with no unacceptably adverse impact identified regarding the appearance of the site or its integration within the surrounding area.
Plans/Drawings/Information;
This decision relates to the following documents and plans:
o Cover Letter and Drawing List o Drw. No. 223-P9000: Site Location Plan, Rev 01. o Drw. No. 223-P9001: Existing Site Plan, Rev 02. o Drw. No. 223-P9002: Proposed Site Plan/Block Plan, Rev 05. o Drw. No. 223-P1000: Existing Floor Plans, Rev 02. o Drw. No. 223-P1001: Proposed Floor Plans, Rev 05. o Drw. No. 223-P3000: Existing Elevations, Rev 02. o Drw. No. 223-P3001: Existing Elevations, Rev 02 o Drw. No. 223-P3002: Proposed Elevations, Rev 04. o Drw. No. 223-P3003: Proposed Elevations, Rev 05 o Drw. No. 223-P3004: Building Heights/Separation
__
Right to Appeal It is recommended that the following organisations should NOT be given the Right to Appeal: o DOI - No objections o Douglas Borough Council - No objections. __
Officer’s Report
1.0 THE APPLICATION SITE 1.1 The application site is the residential curtilage of 15 Third Avenue, Douglas, which is a two-storey detached property sited on the southwestern side of Third Avenue in Douglas that
==== PAGE 3 ====
24/91063/B Page 3 of 8
ends in a cul de sac. The application is bounded by a stone wall to the front which only opens up at the vehicular access, a low masonry wall on the northern, and fencing on the western boundary. A perforated masonry wall and fencing form the boundary with 'Step A Side', 13 Third Avenue, Douglas, to the southeast boundary. Mature hedging also bounds most of the site boundary with neighbouring property, although there are gaps along the hedging.
1.2 The existing dwelling is finished in a pebble dash render, although the front elevation has a combination of pebble dash render, smooth cement render and stone cladding finish. The dwelling has a pitched roof which slopes to the sides as the dwelling has a prominent gable front elevation and is finished in Double Roman concrete tiles. There is an integral garage which has a flat roof over and wraps round part of the north elevation. The dwelling also has a flat roofed living roof extension which projects onto the rear garden.
1.3 The street scene is varied in its current context and comprises of a mix of two storey detached dwellings, with a significant proportion of them rendered and finished in a light colour, although the mix of materials include pebble dash render, Sand and cement render, stone wall cladding, red brick cladding, and tile shingle cladding. There is a balance between modern and traditional properties within the street scene, with a varied range of designs, finishing, themes, and character that reflect their age.
1.4 The dwellings at the end of the close (Nos. 15, 16, 17, 18 and 20) do not have similar front building lines as the other dwellings within the cul de sac as they are set further back from the main road and project further into their rear gardens, placing their rear elevation further back. There is also no uniform built density for the dwelling plots here.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 Planning approval is sought for Single storey side extension to create garage, loft conversion and internal layout changes. External remodelling and associated landscaping.
2.2 The proposed works would comprise the following: 2.2.1 Erection of a single storey side extension to the southwest elevation to accommodate a garage. The front of the extension would be 4.4m wide, the rear 3.8m wide, while the length would be 8.3m long. The projection in front of the dwelling will also be reduced from 4.74m to 2.08m reducing its projection towards the front boundary by 2.66m. The extension would be 3.3m tall (1.3m lower than the refused scheme which was 4.6m tall to the roof ridge) and 3m to the eaves (0.2m lower than the previous). This extension would have a flat roof over. The new side extension would sit about 2.8m from the northwest elevation of the neighbouring property at 13 Third Avenue, and at least 1m from the boundary of this neighbour.
2.2.2 The works would also include reducing the length of the previous garage which is to be converted by 870mm from 6.57m to 5.7m. This area would serve as the new kitchen and dining area.
2.2.3 The works would also include external alterations to the entire dwelling through cladding of its external walls in horizontal clapper board cement cladding (white) with painted architrave detailing window and door surrounds, the inclusion of timber painted columns (white), natural stone dry laid with quoins to be retained (natural green slates). The roofing over the main dwelling will be finished in Natural slate roof with matching ridge tiles (blue) which is a change from the previous Double Roman concert tiles with matching ridge tiles (grey). All windows would be black UPVC casement windows. Front door would be painted hardwood with partial glazing and side lights (black), while the patio and French doors will be fully glazed black UPVC units. Garage door is to be painted hardwood (black).
2.3 Additional works would include:
==== PAGE 4 ====
24/91063/B Page 4 of 8
1. Installation of five new roof lights over the main roof of the dwelling (two on the northwest roof plane and three on the southwest roof plane). This can be installed as permitted development due to their size and number. 2. Closing up the first-floor window on the northwest elevation. 3. Installing a new arched gable window on the second-floor rear (southwest) elevation of the dwelling, and a new circular gable window on the second-floor front (northeast) elevation. 4. New doors and windows would also be installed on the elevations with new fenestrations created to provide for these. 5. Landscaping of the site, including creating a new area of outdoor terrace that would be set 20mm lower that the finished floor height for the ground floor and lower than the rear garden area.
2.4 No trees would be removed to facilitate the development. The applicants have also indicated on the application form that there would be no site level changes. The number of parking spaces beside the garage provision will be 3 parking spaces.
3.0 PLANNING POLICY 3.1 Site Specific 3.1.1 The application site is located within an area identified as being Predominantly Residential on the Area Plan for the East (Map 4 - Douglas), and the site is not within a Conservation Area. The site has low likelihood of flood risks, there are no registered trees on the site, and the site is not within a registered tree area. As such, the following parts of the Strategic Plan are relevant:
3.2 Area: AREA PLAN FOR THE EAST 2020 3.2.1 Given the location of the site and the nature of the proposed development, the following parts of the Area Plan for the East Written Statement are considered relevant:
3.2.1 Section 6.6: Principles of good design "6.6.1 In the Strategic Plan, Strategic Policy 5 states that 'New development, including individual buildings, should be designed so as to make a positive contribution to the environment of the Island'.
6.6.2 A positive contribution means making places which are attractive and safe areas to live, work and invest in. In order to achieve this, it is essential that detailed design proposals be based around an understanding of constraints and opportunities of the site and that the proposal responds positively to local context, in terms of its scale, form, layout, materials, colouring, fenestration and architectural detailing.
6.6.3 This, in turn, depends on good understanding of the local character of the individual settlements in the East. Local character is defined by the natural and physical features of an area, including its topography, the pattern of streets and public spaces, the street scene, the density of development, the scale and form of buildings and the materials used in construction.
6.6.4 Housing developments have been criticised in recent decades for their uniform and standardised appearance. In order to avoid creating homogeneous and sterile neighbourhoods, developers will be encouraged to incorporate a mix of property types of a varying scale, using a range of complementary materials wherever possible."
3.2.2 Urban Environment Proposal 3: "Development proposals must make a positive contribution to local character and distinctiveness. Traditional or contemporary approaches may be appropriate, depending upon the nature of the proposal and the context of the surrounding area."
3.2 National: STRATEGIC PLAN (2016) 1. General Policy 2 - 'Development Control' considerations.
==== PAGE 5 ====
24/91063/B Page 5 of 8
2. Paragraph 8.12.1 - General presumption in favour of extensions to existing properties (excluding Conservation Areas or Registered Buildings). 3. Strategic Policy 1 - Efficient use of land and resources. 4. Strategic Policy 3 - Development to safeguard character of existing towns and villages. 5. Strategic Policy 5 - Design and visual impact. 6. Environment Policy 4 - protects biodiversity (including protected species and designated sites). 7. Environment Policy 42 - character and need to adhere to local distinctiveness. 8. Transport Policy 7 and Appendix A.7.6 - Parking Provisions 9. Community Policy 7 - Designing out criminal and anti-social behaviour. 10. Community Policy 10 - Proper access for firefighting appliances 11. Community Policy 11 - Prevention for the outbreak and spread of fire.
4.0 OTHER MATTERIAL CONSIDERATIONS 4.1 The Residential Design Guide (July 2021) also contains guidance in Sections 2.0 on sustainable construction, Section 3.1 on Local Distinctiveness, 4.0 on Householder Extensions, while Section 7.0 deals with Impact on Neighbouring Properties.
4.2 IOM Biodiversity Strategy 2015 to 2025 seeks to manage biodiversity changes to minimise loss of species and habitats, whilst seeking to maintain, restore and enhance native biodiversity, where necessary. Section 21 deals with Habitat loss actions through promoting a policy of 'no net loss' for semi-natural Manx habitats and species and to ensure that unavoidable loss is replaced or effectively compensated for.
5.0 PLANNING HISTORY 5.1 The application site has been the subject of a previous planning applications for Erection of single storey side extension, Loft conversion, associated external remodelling and landscaping under PA 23/00654/B. This application was approved by the Planning Committee on 12 February 2024 but refused at Appeal.
5.1.1 The appeal inspector made the following conclusion and recommendation: "51. For the reasons set out above, whilst I find no harm in terms of loss of light/overshadowing, or general character and appearance, there would be a significant adverse visual impact in terms of outlook for the occupiers of No 13 Third Avenue. Having considered all matters raised, I therefore conclude that the appeal should succeed. If accepted, this would have the effect of overturning the decision of the Planning Authority to grant planning permission for a single storey side extension, loft conversion, associated external re- modelling and landscaping at 15, Third Avenue, Douglas.
Reason: Although of different design and materials from its neighbours, the street scene here is sufficiently varied that the resultant dwelling would not be seen as particularly incongruous or obtrusive in its setting and there would be no material harm in terms of the character or appearance of the area generally. As such, there would be no conflict with General Policy 2(b), (c) and (g), Strategic Policies 3(b) and 5, or Environment Policy 42 of the Strategic Plan. There would be no conflict either with the Residential Design Guide. However, in terms of living conditions for the occupiers of No 13 Third Avenue, whilst there would be no material harm in terms of loss of light/overshadowing, the size, scale and siting of the proposed side extension, the impact of which would be exacerbated by the changes in ground level here, mean that it would have an overwhelming visual impact, dominating the outlook from the rear of No 13 and its rear garden. There would be conflict in this regard, with General Policy 2(g) of the Strategic Plan and the Residential Design Guide, which together and among other things seek to protect such interests."
6.0 REPRESENTATIONS
==== PAGE 6 ====
24/91063/B Page 6 of 8
Copies of representations received can be viewed on the government's website. This report contains summaries only.
6.1 DOI Highway have no interest (27 September 2024).
6.2 DOI Highways Drainage (21 October 2024): o They state that allowing surface water runoff onto a public highway would contravene Section 58 of the Highway Act 1986, and Guidance contained in section 11.3.11 of the Manual for Manx Roads. o They state that there are no site levels indicating falls. o They advise the applicant to be aware of and demonstrate compliance with the attached clause.
6.3 Douglas Borough Council have no objections to the application (4 October 2024).
6.4 No comments have been received from neighbouring properties.
7.0 ASSESSMENT 7.1 The fundamental issues to considerer in the assessment of this planning application are; 1. Design and Impact on Character and Appearance; 2. Impact on Neighbouring Amenity; and 3. Highway Safety/parking impacts.
7.2 VISUAL IMPACT (GP2, STP 3, EP 42 & RDG 2021) 7.2.1 In evaluating the effects of the design changes on the existing dwelling, it is noted that the proposed works will be prominently visible from the street scene, introducing a series of clearly noticeable alterations. Collectively, these changes will transform the dwelling into a modern dwelling which incorporates elements of the Georgian style architecture that aligns with the varied architectural character of its immediate surroundings, which lack a defined pattern or dominant style. Key design features such as the horizontal clapperboard cement cladding, painted architrave details, timber-painted columns, natural stone with quoins, and natural slate roofing, enhance the dwelling's overall aesthetic quality. These improvements, alongside updated window and door materials, elevate the appearance of the property, representing a significant upgrade from its previously modest and unremarkable exterior.
7.2.2 The site's unique topography and the presence of boundary shrubs and tree clusters, including terrace creation, new planting, and biodiversity enhancements allow the proposed design to harmonize well within the site and immediate surroundings. The street scene itself features a diverse mix of building styles and sizes, ensuring that the proposed works fit within this varied context. The inclusion of new fenestrations, such as arched and circular gable windows, further enhances visual compatibility. Consequently, any impact on the character and appearance of the area is minimal, aligning with General Policy 2.
7.2.3 While the proposed works including the side extension, garage conversion, window and door replacements, external cladding, and landscaping alter the appearance of the dwelling, they ultimately enhance its visual appeal and character. These changes also contribute positively to the area's diverse architectural context. As such, the proposals comply with General Policy 2 (b & c) and Strategic Policies 3 and 5 of the Strategic Plan.
7.3 IMPACT ON NEIGHBOURS (GP 2 & RDG 2021) 7.3.1 The dwelling most likely to be impacted by the proposed development is No.13, located to the south of the application site. The proposed side extension, reduced to 3.3m in height (previously 4.6m), would sit approximately 2.8m from the northwest elevation of No.13. Its front elevation would be set back by about 2.66m from the position of the front elevation of No.13. This reduction in projection towards the front boundary, resulting from the adjustment
==== PAGE 7 ====
24/91063/B Page 7 of 8
to the garage's front elevation, mitigates overshadowing impacts on the northern elevation window of the neighbouring property.
7.3.2 Additionally, the separation distance between the extension and No.13 has increased from 2.1m to 2.8m, a 700mm increase which further reduces concerns about proximity and overshadowing. Being positioned to the north of No.13 also minimizes the risk of overshadowing, as sunlight predominantly moves in an east-to-west orientation.
7.3.3 The design of the extension ensures it does not project into the rear garden. It has been pushed back by 3m from the rear building line and 5.4m behind the previously proposed positioning of the rear elevation. This adjustment lessens the likelihood of loss of light or overbearing impacts. Moreover, the extension remains within the existing positions of the dwelling's front and rear building lines and maintains subordination to the two-story dwelling.
7.3.4 Collectively, the revised scheme incorporates significant changes, including the reduced height of 3.3m, a front elevation setback of 1.74m (revised from 4.4m), an eaves height of 3m, and a reduced rear projection by 5.4m. These revisions ensure that any impacts in terms of overshadowing/loss of light, or overbearing remain negligible. The proposal aligns with the site context and does not warrant refusal. Based on the foregoing, it is not considered that any impacts in terms of loss of light and overbearing impacts on No. 13 Third Avenue would be sufficient to warrant refusal of the scheme, given the prevailing site character and context.
7.3.5 Regarding the impacts on No. 12 Second Avenue, the primary concern is the potential overlooking caused by the proposed arched gable window on the second-floor rear (west) elevation of the dwelling. However, the applicants have provided distance measurements on the site plan, confirming that the distance between the new window and the rear window of this neighbouring property exceeds 20 meters. Additionally, the overall layout of the dwellings in this area naturally allows for some degree of mutual overlooking of rear gardens. As such, any views of the neighbouring rear garden would not be considered unusual. Furthermore, the mature vegetation along the boundary between these properties effectively mitigates any concerns regarding overlooking. No other issues have been identified as concerns for this neighbour in terms of overshadowing or overbearing impacts. It is also not anticipated that the landscaping works or the creation of the terrace would negatively affect this neighbour, as there would be no increase in site levels compared to the existing conditions. The works would include only the levelling of parts of the rear garden and addition of flag steps to facilitate movement between the varying site levels.
7.3.6 Similarly, it is not considered that the proposal would cause concerns for No. 17. The Juliet balcony, previously proposed for the west elevation and potentially causing overlooking into the rear garden of No. 17, has been removed from the plans. Furthermore, the existing first-floor window on the north elevation is set to be removed, providing an improvement over the current situation for both properties. Therefore, the proposed scheme is considered to enhance conditions for No. 17 by eliminating features that might otherwise raise concerns for this neighbour.
7.4 IMPACTS ON PARKING AND HIGHWAY SAFETY (TP7 & GP2) 7.4.1 When assessing the potential impacts of the scheme in terms of parking and highway safety impacts, it is considered that the existing double garage which currently exists at the property would be removed via alterations to the internal layout of the garage to create a new kitchen and dining area, with changes to replace the garage door with a new bay window. However, the new garage extension would offer one singe parking space, with the site layout also altered to allow for at least three additional parking spaces on the hardstanding area, and this is considered to be above the strategic plan requirement for a dwelling. In addition, the reconfiguration of the site layout will provide better allowance for pedestrian movements on site. Vehicles would also be able to leave the site in forward gear which would be an
==== PAGE 8 ====
24/91063/B Page 8 of 8
improvement over the existing, thus resulting in improved parking and highway safety for the site.
7.4.2 Further to the above, Highway Services have reviewed the proposal and expressed no objections, which indicates that they do not have any concerns about this aspect of the scheme. As a result, this element of the proposal is deemed to comply with the requirements of the relevant policies.
8.0 CONCLUSION 8.1 Overall, it is considered that the design, highway impacts and visual impacts are acceptable, and the proposal would not result in significant harm to public or private amenity. The application is, therefore, recommended for approval.
9.0 RIGHT TO APPEAL AND RIGHT TO GIVE EVIDENCE 9.1 The Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 sets out the process for determining planning applications (including appeals). It sets out a Right to Appeal (i.e. to submit an appeal against a planning decision) and a Right to Give Evidence at Appeals (i.e. to participate in an appeal if one is submitted).
9.2 Article A10 sets out that the right to appeal is available to: o applicant (in all cases); o a Local Authority; Government Department; Manx Utilities; and Manx National Heritage that submit a relevant objection; and o any other person who has made an objection that meets specified criteria.
9.3 Article 8(2)(a) requires that in determining an application, the Department must decide who has a right to appeal, in accordance with the criteria set out in article A10.
9.4 The Order automatically affords the Right to Give Evidence to the following (no determination is required): o any appellant or potential appellant (which includes the applicant); o the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture, the Department of Infrastructure and the local authority for the area; o any other person who has submitted written representations (this can include other Government Departments and Local Authorities); and o in the case of a petition, a single representative.
__
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 and that in making this decision the Officer has agreed the recommendation in relation to who should be afforded interested person status and/or rights to appeal.
Decision Made : Permitted
Date: 07.04.2025
Determining Officer
Signed : J SINGLETON
Jason Singleton
Principal Planner
Customer note
This copy of the officer report reflects the content of the office copy and has been produced in this form for the benefit of our online service/customers and archive record.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal