DEC Officer Report

Application No.: 19/01072/B Applicant: Mr Daniel & Mrs Jade Zorab Proposal: Variation of condition one of PA 15/01027B, Alterations, erection of two storey extensions and single storey garage link extension to dwelling, to extend period of permission by four years Site Address: 156 Fairways Crescent Mount Murray Douglas Isle Of Man IM4 2JJ Planning Officer: Miss Lucy Kinrade Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 08.01.2020 _________________________________________________________________

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 16th December 2023.

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 Site Location Plan and drawing numbers 02 Rev B, 03 Rev C, 04 Rev A all date stamped and received 24/09/2019. _______________________________________________________________

Interested Person Status – Additional Persons

None _____________________________________________________________________________

Officer’s Report

1.0 THE APPLICATION SITE - 1.1 The application site is the curtilage of 156 Fairways Crescent, a detached two-storey dwelling in the Mount Murray estate. Typically for the area, the dwelling has some mock-Tudor design features and is more or less surrounded by trees. Although there are some

• neighbouring properties within the cul-de-sac, the dwellings in this part of Fairways Crescent and Fairways Approach do sit apart from one another or feel further from one another due to the number of existing mature trees.
• 1.2 In 2015 under PA 15/01027/B the dwelling was granted full planning approval for a number of alterations and extensions to the property to create additional living accommodation. These works included two storey extensions to both the front and rear of the main dwelling and a single storey extension to the rear of the detached garage linked to the main house to provide additional living accommodation.

2.0 THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 The current application seeks approval for the variation of condition one of PA 15/01027/B to extend the period of approval by a further four years. - 2.2 No other works are proposed.

3.0 PLANNING HISTORY - 3.1 The most relevant application is previously approved PA 15/01027/B which was granted full approval 16th December 2015. Prior to this, planning approval was granted in 2007 for the installation of a door with canopy above under PA 07/00381/B and the dwelling itself was approved in 2004 under PA 04/01493/B.

4.0 PLANNING POLICY - 4.1 The application site is within an area zoned as Tourist Accommodation in Parkland under the Braddan Local Plan 1991. Since the determination of the 2015 application the Residential Design Guide has been introduced (March 2019) and work has commenced in the preparation of the Area Plan for the East. The draft plan has been considered by an Inspector but remains as a draft at this time. The Inspectors report on the draft plan states (in part): - 4.2 "Large Developed Areas Outside Settlements

• Paragraph 23 There are a number of substantial areas of consolidated development in the East, which lie outside the Existing Settlements Boundaries shown in the draft Area Plan Proposals Maps, and are not designated for future development. They include the Snugborough Trading Estate; the residential areas at Mount Murray and Braddan Hills; and the complex of waste management uses at Richmond Hill (adjacent to and including the Energy from Waste incinerator). Environment Policy 1 of the Strategic Plan indicates that land which is outside the settlements defined in Appendix 3 of that document, and which is not designated for future development in an Area Plan, is to be treated as 'countryside'.
• Paragraph 24 However, it seems to me that it would be wholly inappropriate to apply the policies that apply in the countryside to these areas that are already substantially developed…..Proposed Change 75 (in PIP5) now indicates that appropriate colour washes should be applied to the Proposals Map, to show the Mount Murray and Braddan Hills areas as 'Predominantly 10 Residential'; and the Snugborough Estate as 'Industrial'. I agree with this. I also recommend that the whole of the waste management area at Richmond Hill should be similarly delineated and washed over as a site for 'Special Industry' (as defined in paragraph 9.2.3 of the Strategic Plan)."

4.3 This application as did the previous application will continue to consider the current proposal in light of general standards towards development set out in General Policy 2 of the Strategic Plan. Aforementioned consideration will also be given to the relevant parts of the Residential Design Guidance that refer to extensions to existing dwellings ensuring that they are appropriate to the existing in terms of size, design and appearance of the existing and that they do not result in any adverse, overbearing or overlooking impacts on the neighbours.

Those specific parts of the guide being sections; 3.0 Householder Extensions, 4.0 Types Of Householder Extension and 7.0 Impact On Neighbouring Properties.

5.0 REPRESENTATIONS Copies of representations received can be viewed on the Government's website. This report contains summaries only. - 5.1 Braddan Parish Commissioners - no objection (22/10/2019) - 5.2 Department of Infrastructure (DOI) Highways Division - Do Not Oppose (16/10/2019)

6.0 ASSESSMENT - 6.1 The principal issue in the determination of this application is whether there have been any changes to planning policy since the original approval PA 15/01027/B, or whether there have been any new material considerations to take in to account (i.e. Policy changes/ changes to the site or land used designations/Local Plan changes, introduction of new guidance etc) - 6.2 In the case of this site and application the Residential Design Guide has been introduced and the Area Plan for the East is in progress and has been considered by an Inspector but still remains in a draft status and as this has not yet been adopted, the Braddan Local Plan 1991 is still relevant as is General Policy 2 from the Strategic Plan. There have been no objections received for the current application. - 6.3 Under PA 15/01027/B the Case Officer concluded the following points in respect of the proposal, these have been summarised from the original officer's report as follows:

• o Not considered to impact on highway safety as no car parking spaces were being removed;
• o The dwelling is set down somewhat from the surrounding area; views are limited to private views from dwellings to the west and north;
• o Extensions are not of an inappropriate scale as to be incompatible with the streetscene, which is characterised by a variety of forms and mass, with the key unifying feature being the mock-Tudor detailing. The impact on the streetscene would not be significant;
• o The proposed extensions vary in nature but reflect and build upon the existing mass of the application site and the dwelling and extensions are angled as such that there would be no significant change to the relationship between the dwelling and its immediate neighbours;
• o The south-western elevation would have fewer windows facing no.158, and the distance of over 16m would be sufficient to mean there would be no harmful overbearing impacts or loss of light. To the northeast, the extension along the boundary with no.157 would be at single storey level and thus not be especially visible. Although the extension would come very close the boundary between these dwellings is presently well-established in terms of the existing vegetation and fencing, and the primary garden land to no.157 is to the opposite side
• of its plot from this proposed extension (although it was acknowledged that the permanent retention of trees cannot be relied upon, but the circumstances are such that even without the trees / hedging, it is considered that the impact of the proposal on neighbouring living conditions would not be so harmful as to warrant the application's refusal.);
• o While the proposed works appear somewhat piecemeal and intended to meet a number
• of specific requirements, that perhaps a more holistic view for the whole dwelling might have enabled a more coherent design outcome. However, it equally remains the case that the dwelling does not, beside its mock-Tudor finish, benefit from a particularly well-articulated architectural treatment and there is an argument that what's proposed would fit in with this characterisation and that an objection on design grounds could not be sustained.

6.4 The application was approved on 16/12/2015 with just the standard 4 year condition, with an expiration of 16/12/2019. The current application for the variation of the condition was submitted to the Department on 24/09/2019 and before the expiration date.

6.5 The key policy in the determination remains as GP2. The most recently released Residential Design Guidance sets out how the Department interprets and applies the Development Plan policies in relation to residential design and seeks to set out in writing the general rules of thumb which can help towards improving the whole design process and in encouraging an improved quality of the overall built environment. These general rules of thumb covering areas such as the 45 degree rule in assessing overbearingness, 20m rule in understanding privacy impact and local distinctiveness and context in understanding visual impact of design. - 6.6 In light of the policy and the Residential Design Guidance it is still considered that the proposed development still presents an acceptable form of extension to the existing dwelling for the same reasons set out by the 2015 case officer and still in compliance with GP2 and now acceptable in terms of the Residential Design Guide.

7.0 CONCLUSION 7.1 For the reasons set out above, it is considered that it is appropriate to approve the variation of condition one and extend the approval for a further 4 years.

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 : 10.01.2020 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.