DEC Officer Report

PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Application No.: 21/01017/B Applicant: Mr Alistair MacLaren Proposal: Erection of an extension to side elevations and installation of replacement roof tiles Site Address: Ravensdale Strang Road Union Mills Isle Of Man IM4 4NW Planning Officer: Mr Peiran Shen Photo Taken: 22.10.2021 Site Visit: 22.10.2021 Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 08.04.2022

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. The roof of the main dwelling must be built according to drawing no. 439-01 Rev B as having been received on 05th April 2022. Reason: in the interest of maintain the character of the area and the streetscene.

This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason. This application is considered to comply with General Policy 2 of the Strategic Plan and the Residential Design Guide 2021.

Plans/Drawings/Information;

This approval is related to the documents and drawing no 439-01 Rev B, having been submitted on 8th April 2022. _______________________________________________________________

Interested Person Status

Additional Persons

None _____________________________________________________________________________

Officer’s Report

1.0 THE SITE - 1.1 The application site is the residential curtilage of Ravensdale, Strang Road, Union Mills, a single-storey detached dwelling located on the north of Strang Road, relatively close to its junction with Main Road. - 1.2 The dwelling is located on an elevated platform at the front of the site. The main roof is a hipped-roof. There are two pitched roof bay windows at the front. There is also a first floor space created by a pyramid roof on the front elevation but behind the pitched roofs. The height from the platform to the hipped roof is approx. 5.27m. The height from the platform to the tip of the pyramid roof is approx. 5.88m.

2.0 THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 The proposed work is the erection of a side extension and replacing the existing roof with a flat roof with gables while keeping the pitched roofs for the bay windows. The work also involves the erection of a flat-roof dormer at the rear of the site. - 2.2 The proposed side extension will meet the front and east elevation of the dwelling. It will have two glazed entry door, a fixed panel window and a rooflight on the east elevation. - 2.3 The new flat roof with gables will have a height of approx. 5.45m from the platform to the top of the roof. It will have four small rooflights in the front and a four-pane rooflights at the rear. The front and two sides of the flat roof will be decorated by semi-circle tiles around the edge. - 2.4 The top of the flat-roof dormer will have the same height of the main roof. Its width is approx. one third of the flat roof and it is located in the middle of the rear elevation. - 2.5 The work also includes replacing a rear window and French door with a bi-fold door.

- 3.0 PLANNING HISTORY

3.1 There is no previous application considered materially relevant to this application. - 4.0 PLANNING POLICY

4.1 The site lies within an area designated as Predominantly Residential in the Area Plan for the East.

4.2 The Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 contains the following policies that are considered materially relevant to the assessment of this current planning application: - 4.3 General Policy 2: "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".

4.4 "8.12.1 Extensions to Dwellings in built-up areas or sites designated for residential use:

• As a general policy, in built-up areas not controlled by Conservation Area or Registered Building policies, there will be a general presumption in favour of extensions to an existing property where such extensions would not have an adverse impact on either adjacent property or the surrounding area in general."
• 4.5 Residential Design Guidance (July 2021) provides advice on the design of new houses and extensions to an existing property as well as how to assess the impact of such development on the living conditions of those in adjacent residential property.
• 4.6 RDG 4.8 Extension to Side Elevations sets out key considerations for side elevation extension. These include the potential visual appearance of the extension within the street scene and of the individual dwelling as well as the impact on the amenities of those in neighbouring properties. These impacts can be regulated by designing with the right location, size, and architecture style. The section also specifically mentioned that detached/semidetached dwellings should avoid a terraced appearance due to two extensions being placed too close to each other.
• 4.7 RDG 4.10 Dormer Extensions sets out some key considerations. These include a general concern for the potential impact on the character and appearance of both the individual property and the wider street scene. There is also a concern for overlooking if not created for a non-habitable room with obscured glazing. There is a general assumption against dormers if they are publicly visible. It should generally have a pitched roof. Finishing in a tile or tiled like material can reduce the visual impact. The position and size should be secondary to the roof which will be positioned on.
• 4.8 RDG 5 sets out key considerations regarding architectural details. These include window details and external finishing. The general idea is that the extension should have a similar style with the main dwelling for a coherent appearance unless the clash between modern and traditional design can be handled with elegance.
• 4.9 RDG 7 sets out key considerations regarding the impact on neighbouring properties. These include the potential loss of light/overshadowing, overbearing impact upon outlook and overlooking resulting in a loss of privacy.

- 5.0 REPRESENTATION

5.1 Braddan parish Commissioners has no objection on this application (28/09/2021& 24/01/2022).

5.2 DoI Highway Services states there is no highway interest in this application (14/09/2021 ). - 6.0 ASSESSMENT

6.1 The main concerns for this application are its impact on the house itself, on the character and street scene of the area and on the amenities of the neighbours.

6.2 The side extension is designed in a similar style as the main dwelling, therefore, the design and its overall visual impact is considered acceptable.

6.3 The new roof is considered to be an improvement from the existing as the roofscape. The existing roof has several styles but are not very coordinated. The proposed is plain and shows clearly the structure of the house. Although the flat roof is not ideal, the proposed semicircle tiles on the leading edge will give the impression of a flat roof and will mitigate this negative impact on the streetscene. Therefore, the roof is considered acceptable and the decorative tiles will be conditioned.

6.4 The proposed flat-roof dormer roof has the same height as the ridge of the main dwelling. Although both the flat roof and the height are clearly not favourable, as stated in the RDG, the position of this dormer is reasonable given the rear garden is at an elevated level and the roof is reasonable given the proposed flat main roof. Therefore, the dormer design is considered acceptable. - 6.5 The proposed rooflight at the front and rear elevation does not negatively impact the house itself nor the character and streetscene of the area and area considered acceptable. - 6.6 The proposal in general does not have a negative impact on the character or streetscene of the area. Therefore, the design is considered acceptable. - 6.7 After the site visit, it is considered that the proposal does not create additional overlooking given the new dormer does not created a new vantage point that is higher than the exiting elevated terrace at the rear of the site. Therefore, it is considered that there is no impact on neighbouring amenities.

- 7.0 CONCLUSION

7.1 The proposal is considered to comply with General Policy 2 of the Strategic Plan and the Residential Design Guide 2021. Therefore, it is recommended for an approval. - 8.0 INTEREST 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 which 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 and that in making this decision the Officer has agreed the recommendation in relation to who should be afforded Interested Person Status.

Decision Made : Permitted Date: 12.04.2022 Determining officer

Signed : J SINGLETON Jason Singleton 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.