Planning Officer Report

Officer's Report

Application No.:	11/00977/B
Applicant:	EFB Property Investments (IOM) Ltd
Proposal:	Alterations, extension and conversion of former Residential Home into a private dwelling (comprising amendments to PA 11/00026/B)
Site Address:	Cubbon House 3 Marathon Road Douglas Isle Of Man IM2 4HN
Case Officer:	Mrs Jade Craig
Photo Taken:	16.02.2011
Site Visit:	16.02.2011
Expected Decision Level:	Officer Delegation

The Site

1. The application site represents the curtilage of an existing detached Victorian property set within its own grounds. Until recently the site has been used as a Residential Care Home.

1. The building is two storeys tall, plus living accommodation provided by dormers in the roof space. The front of the property faces south-east towards Marathon Road and it is set back from the road by over 20 metres. The boundary to Marathon Road consists of a high stone wall. The ground level of the site slopes up from Marathon Road to the rear of the property.

The Proposal

1. Proposed are alterations, extensions, refurbishment and conversion of the former Residential Home into a private dwelling (comprising amendments to PA 11/00026/B).

1. The previous planning approval (PA 11/00026/B) was approved for alterations, extensions and refurbishment to the property, including the following:

• Removing various features associated with the use of the building as a care home, including the external lift shaft and plant room, the external fire escape and the redundant external pipe work from the various bathrooms.
• Replacing the existing pvc casement windows with pvc sliding sashes.
• Revising the internal layout to form a domestic arrangement.
• Erecting an orangery extension and patio area to the rear and side of the property.
• Installing a Juliet balcony at first floor level on the existing building.
• Erecting new canopy entrances to the front and side elevations.
• Widening the former main entrance from Marathon Road, forming a new driveway and installing a new door onto the driveway from the existing garage to the rear of the main building.

1. The changes now proposed since the previous planning application was approved include the following:

• Revising the internal domestic layout.
• Enlarging the approved orangery and reducing the number of windows on it. The orangery would be extended further forward along the side of the dwelling by 3.5 metres and further towards the rear in part by 1.7 metres.
• Extending the approved decking area further forward along the side of the dwelling by 9 metres, with two separate levels.

• Removing the existing rear chimneystack.
• Moving the position of an approved door on the north-east side elevation.
• Installing a window instead of the approved Juliet balcony.
• Blocking up some of the approved or existing window openings to the side and rear and installing some new openings.
• Installing 5 rooflights to the rear roof slope, rather than the 1 approved.

Planning History

1. The following previous planning application is considered relevant in the assessment and determination of this application;

• 11/00026/B – Permitted 01/03/11

Alterations, erection of an extension and conversion of former Residential Care Home into a private dwelling.

Development Plan Policies

1. The application site is located within an area designated as Predominantly Residential Use on the Douglas Local Plan Order 1998, Map No. 2 (South). The site is not located within a Conservation Area.

1. The relevant planning policy from the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 is General Policy 2 Paragraph 8.12.1 for extensions to dwellings in built up residential areas is also appropriate.

1. 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."

1. Paragraph 8.12.1 states:

"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 existing property where such extensions would not have an adverse impact on either adjacent property or the surrounding area in general."

Consultations

1. Douglas Corporation have no objection to the proposal.

1. The Drainage Division of Douglas Borough Council does not object to the application, subject to the proposed rear extension being connected to the public sewer(s), in accordance with the requirements of the Isle of Man Water and Sewerage Authority. They also state that prior to the commencement of works, the exact details of the drainage layout must be provided to the Drainage Section of Douglas Borough Council and approved.

1. The Highways Division of the Department of Infrastructure do not oppose this application.

Representations

1. The owner-occupiers of Inglenook, 1 Marathon Road, Douglas, have raised concerns about the proposal. Their property is immediately to the south of the application site. They are concerned that the works would remove part of their shared boundary wall to the rear of their property adjacent to their garage, which would reduce the space which they currently have for manoeuvring. Their concerns have arisen from the plans showing the existing rear entrance as being 1 metre wider than it actually is and although no alterations are stated on the proposed drawings, they are concerned that the entrance will be widened by 1 metre. Although the entrance also looked wrong to them in the previous planning application (11/00026/B), the earlier drawing stated "electric powered gates in existing vehicle opening", but this statement is not included on the current proposed drawing. They state that they would have no objection to replacement piers being constructed to the entrance, as long as they did not widen the existing vehicular entrance. They recommend that the approval of the application should be subject to the developer respecting the boundary of their land and not widening the existing entrance.

Assessment

1. As with the previous planning application (11/00026/B), the main issues in the assessment of this proposal are the impact on neighbouring properties and the impact on the surrounding area in general.

Impact on neighbouring properties;

1. The impact on neighbouring properties was deemed to be acceptable in the previous planning application. It is considered that the changes now proposed would not impact on neighbouring properties to an unacceptable degree. The proposals would result in no additional overlooking or loss of light to the adjacent properties.

1. The owners of 1 Marathon Road are concerned that the proposal would result in the widening of the existing rear entrance and therefore the removal of part of the boundary wall which they share with the application site. The proposed plans do not state that the entrance would be widened, but the objectors are concerned that the existing plans are incorrect as they show the entrance as being 1 metre wider than it currently is. This appears to be an issue between neighbours rather than a strict planning matter, but if the matter is not resolved at this stage, the application could be taken to Appeal.

1. I informed the agent about the neighbour's concerns and gave them the opportunity to resolve the issue. The Planning Authority has received a copy of a letter from the agent to the objector confirming that they do not intend to increase the width of the existing vehicle opening, but nothing further has been received from the objector. It is therefore felt appropriate to attach a note to any approval notice to clarify that the approval does not include the widening of the entrance.

Impact on the surrounding area in general;

1. The alterations to the property would return it to being a Victorian style dwelling. In the previous application, it was felt that the proposed alterations and extensions would add

interest to the site and not detract from the overall Victorian architecture. The proposed sliding sash windows would be an enhancement to the existing property, as they are thought to be more in keeping with the Victorian architecture than the existing casements.

1. The alterations in this current proposal would result in a larger orangery and decking area to the rear and side of the property. Overall, it is considered that the main building is large enough for these alterations to still appear as subordinate to it. This is also helped by the fact that these alterations would be set behind the front building line of the dwelling. In addition to this, the site is large enough to accommodate the extensions whilst retaining adequate space around them.

Recommendation

1. For the above reasons, this proposal is considered to be acceptable and is recommended for approval.

1. Due to the concerns raised by the owner of 1 Marathon Road, it is felt appropriate to attach a note to the approval notice so it is clear that permission has not been given for alterations to remove the existing boundary wall adjacent to the rear entrance.

Party Status

1. It is considered that the following parties should be afforded interested party status:

• Douglas Corporation is, by virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2005, paragraph 6 (5) (d), considered an “interested person” and as such should be afforded party status.
• The owners of Inglenook, 1 Marathon Road, live in a property which directly adjoins the application site, so they should be afforded party status.

1. It is considered that the following parties, who submitted comments, should not be afforded Interested party status:

• The Department of Transport Highways Division is now part of the Department of Infrastructure of which the planning authority is part. As such, the Highways and Traffic Division cannot be afforded party status in this instance.
• The Drainage Division of Douglas Borough Council.

Recommendation

Recommended Decision: Permitted

Date of Recommendation: 05.10.2011

Conditions and Notes for Approval / Reasons and Notes for Refusal

C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions R : Reasons for refusal

• : Notes attached to refusals

C 1. The development hereby permitted shall commence before the expiration of four years from the date of this notice.

C 2.

This approval relates to alterations, extensions and the conversion of former Residential Home into a private dwelling (comprising amendments to PA 11/00026/B); as shown in drawing numbers P01, P02, P03, P04, P05, P06 and P07, all date stamped 21 July 2011.

N 3.

For the avoidance of doubt, this approval does not allow the existing rear entrance to be widened. Such works would be subject to a separate planning application.

I confirm that this decision accords with the appropriate Government Circular delegating functions to Director of Planning and Building Control / Development Control Manager.

Decision Made : Permitted Date : 20/10/11

Signed : OR Signed : _________________________ Jennifer Chance Development Control Manager