Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
21/01093/B Page 1 of 6
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Application No. : 21/01093/B Applicant : Mr Christopher Brownlow Proposal : Alterations including replacement and removal of windows and patio doors, removal of 2 chimney stacks, removal of existing front porch and extension to existing patio Site Address : Clarecourt Marathon Road Douglas Isle Of Man IM2 4HL
Planning Officer: Mr Peiran Shen Photo Taken :
Site Visit : Expected Decision Level : Officer Delegation
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Permitted Date of Recommendation: 02.02.2022 __
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.
This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason. Although the loss of chimneys is regrettable, overall this application is considered to be appropriate in terms of General Policy 2 and the Residential Design Guide.
Plans/Drawings/Information;
This approval relates to the documents, photos and drawing no. 01, 02, 03, 05 as having been received on 20th September 2021 and drawing no. 04A, 06A as having been received on 20th January 2022.
__
Interested Person Status - Additional Persons
It is recommended that the owners/occupiers of the following properties should not be given Interested Person Status as they are not 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 4(2):
==== PAGE 2 ====
21/01093/B Page 2 of 6
Clarecourt Gardens, 47 Victoria Road, Douglas
as they do not refer to the relevant issues in accordance with paragraph 2C of the Policy. __
Officer’s Report
1.0 THE SITE 1.1 The site is the residential curtilage of Clarecourt, Marathon Road, Douglas, a two-storey detached dwelling located on the southeast of Marathon Road. The dwelling is vacant at the moment.
1.2 The dwelling consists of a u-shaped cross-pitched-roof main dwelling, a two-storey flat- roof extension infill the centre, a mono-pitched-roof single-storey porch filling the space among the pitched-roof main dwelling and the flat roof extension up to the front elevation of the main dwelling and a glazed mono-pitched single-storey porch on the front elevation. There is also a very thin two-storey hipped-roof bay window extension on the south of the rear elevation.
1.3 There are three chimneystacks on the dwelling. One on each side elevation and one on the pitched roof on the front elevation.
1.4 There is a raised timber patio on the rear elevation of the main dwelling. The rear garden is sloping down towards the end of the property.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 The proposed includes the demolition of two chimneystacks, the replacement of the roof tiles, the erection of a replacement flat-roof porch, blocking off a number of windows on the side and rear elevations, the erection of a replacement patio with glass balustrade, the replacement of existing bi-fold doors on the rear elevations, replacing the bay window with a bi-fold door and the installation of a Juliet balcony.
2.2 The proposal also includes levelling the rear garden.
2.3 The proposal, in addition, includes a number of permitted development, such as replacing windows and the erection of boundary fences. There are also a number of non- development engineering operation, such as re-rendering external elevations and replacing rain water goods.
3.0 PLANNING HISTORY 3.1 Replacement dwelling with attached garage was APPROVED at APPEAL under PA 17/00939/B. This approval has lapsed.
4.0 PLANNING POLICY Site Specific 4.1 In terms of local policy, the site is within an area designated as Predominantly Residential in the Area Plan for the East.
4.2 There are no planning constraints overlapping with the site.
Strategic Policy 4.3 The Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 contains the following policies that are considered materially relevant to the assessment of this current planning application:
Principles of Developments 4.4 General Policy 1 states:
==== PAGE 3 ====
21/01093/B Page 3 of 6
"The determination of matters under Part 2 (Development Control) and Part 3 (Special Controls) of the 1999 Town and Country Planning Act shall have regard to the provisions of the Development Plan and all other material considerations."
4.5 General Policy 2, which provides an overall requirement for all development, 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: (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; (i) does not have an unacceptable effect on road safety or traffic flows on the local highways; (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."
Visual Design 4.6 Strategic Policy 3 and Environment Policy 42 all focus on the visual design of developments, they state that the design should take account of the local materials, character and identity of its immediate locality, in terms of buildings and landscape features.
Environment 4.7 Strategic Policy 5 states: "New development, including individual buildings, should be designed so as to make a positive contribution to the environment of the Island." Then, Infrastructure Policy 5 particularly states that "Development proposals should incorporate methods for water conservation and management measures to conserve the Island's water resources."
Safety and Security 4.8 Community Policy 7, 10 and 11 state that the design of new development must, as far as is reasonable and practicable, pay due regards to existing best practise such as to prevent criminal and anti-social behaviour and outbreak and spread of fire. In addition, development should also provide proper access for fire-fighting vehicles and adequate supplies of water for fire-fighting purposes."
PPS and NPD 4.9 There is no relevant Planning Policy Statement or National Policy Directive applicable to this application.
5.0 OTHER MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS Strategy and Guidance 5.1 The Residential Design Guide (July 2021) provides guidance 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. Therefore, it is considered that the Guide is materially relevant to this application.
5.2 RDG 4.5 Front Extension sets out key considerations for front elevation extension. It considers an extension to the front of a property can have the greatest impact upon the individual dwelling and/or the street scene. There may be limited circumstances when a front extension is appropriate, for example where the street has an irregular building line or pattern. It also states that any extension should normally appear as if it were designed with the original building and not look out of place in the street. A porch extension is perhaps the most common form of extension to the front elevation of a dwelling. Whilst porches are relatively small in size, careful consideration still needs to be given.
==== PAGE 4 ====
21/01093/B Page 4 of 6
5.3 RDG 4.6 Rear Extensions set out some key considerations. These include the impact on the amenities of those in neighbouring properties such as loss of light and/or overbearing. These impacts can be regulated by designing with the right depth (projection) and location. The section also specifically mentioned that terraced/semi-detached dwellings have the potential for the greatest concern due to the potential of "tunnel effect". It also points out that single-storey extensions are unlikely to be supported where they project more than 3 metres from the back of the house
5.4 RDG 4.7 Flat Roof Extension sets out some key considerations regarding the acceptability and details of having a flat roof for extensions. It states that a parapet should be used along with architectural detailing. Furthermore, contemporary design can be acceptable in certain circumstances.
5.5 RDG 4.11 Roof Terraces, Balconies, Decking and Patios sets out key considerations for decking. "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."
5.6 RDG Chapter 5 sets out key considerations regarding architectural details. These include window details and external finishing. The general idea is that development should fit in with the street scene and the building itself.
5.7 RDG 5.1.1 state: "Chimneystacks make an important contribution to the character and appearance of dwellings, the street scene and the skyline. They are also often particularly important features of many dwelling designs which as well as being functional provide interesting and distinctive patterns in the roofline often making a positive contribution to the particular quality and general appearance of an area. Extensions and roof alterations should avoid the loss of a chimneystack that positively contributes to the dwelling's character and appearance. The Department encourages, wherever practical, the retention of prominent chimney stacks to traditional/period properties, which add to the character and quality of the street scene, especially where the individual property is within a Conservation Area."
5.8 RDG Chapter 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.
Other Material Considerations 5.9 There is no other material considerations considered relevant to this application.
6.0 REPRESENTATIONS 6.1 Douglas Borough Council does not object to this application (08.10.2021).
6.2 Highway Services states there is no highway interest in this application (06.10.2021).
6.3 Clarecourt Gardens, 47 Victoria Road wrote in objection to this application (07/10/2021). The comment state that the proposed boundary wall would be overbearing. The comment also express concerns that there is no indication of how surface water and runoff from the house will be disposed of.
6.4 Clarecourt Gardens, 47 Victoria Road retracted their objection (27.11.2021) after an amended plan was submitted by the applicant removed the proposed boundary wall and replaced it with a fence and less radical site-level treatment.
7.0 ASSESSMENT
==== PAGE 5 ====
21/01093/B Page 5 of 6
7.1 The key considerations in the determination of 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.
Design of the House Itself 7.2 The existing chimneystacks are a feature of the house. Their removal are regrettable but no enough reason alone to recommend refusal. This is because the street has a variety of residential properties, including apartments, detached and semi-detached dwellings. The design of the house is a character in itself and losing the chimney does not reduce the character of the detached dwelling brought to the streetscene.
7.3 The replacement porch has a flat roof. Since there is already a flat-roof element on the main dwelling, the flat roof on the porch is considered to respect the exiting design of the dwelling. The architectural details of the proposed porch are considered to add character to the existing front elevation. The replacement porch is also a great improvement compared to the existing glazed porch.
7.4 Replacing roof tiles and blocking off windows on the side and rear elevation are considered to have a neutral impact on the character of the house.
7.5 The replacement patio and bi-fold doors are considered to be an improvement from the existing patio and rear elevation.
7.6 The replacement bi-fold door on the first floor with the installation of a Juliet balcony is considered to have a neutral impact on the character of the house.
7.7 Although being permitted development and not being assessed in this application, the replacement of windows are considered to greatly improve the character and design of the house as it returned to the more traditional small panel design which matches the traditional character of the house.
Character and Street Scene 7.8 The proposal would unify the traditional and contemporary design elements of the dwelling. The design of the house is considered a positive contribution to the character of the area and the proposed front elevation is considered a great improvement to the streetscene of Marathon Road.
Neighbouring Amenities 7.9 There is no change in the size of the dwelling. Therefore, there is no concern for overbearing or overshadowing.
7.10 There is no new vantage point created. Therefore, there is no concern for additional overlooking.
8.0 CONCLUSION 8.1 The proposal is considered to comply with General Policy 2 of the Strategic Plan. Therefore, it is recommended for an approval.
8.2 Although the loss of chimneys is regrettable, overall this application is considered to be appropriate in terms of General Policy 2 and the Residential Design Guide.
9.0 INTEREST PERSON STATUS 9.1 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);
==== PAGE 6 ====
21/01093/B Page 6 of 6
(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.
9.2 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 the Head of Development Management 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 : 04.02.2022
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.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal