DEC Officer Report

Application No.: 19/01232/B Applicant: Mr Christopher Arrowsmith Proposal: Alterations, erection of garden room with balcony deck area above Site Address: Minorca Chapel Minorca Hill Laxey Isle Of Man IM4 7DP Principal Planner: Mr Chris Balmer Photo Taken: 26.11.2019 Site Visit: 26.11.2019 Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 16.12.2019 _________________________________________________________________

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 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 the submitted documents and drawings reference numbers 01, 02 and 03 all received on 5th November 2019. _______________________________________________________________

Interested Person Status – Additional Persons

None _____________________________________________________________________________

Officer’s Report

1.0 SITE - 1.1 The proposal site is the residential curtilage of Minorca Hill Chapel, Minorca Hill, Laxey. The area is characterised as a mainly low-density residential area, with some contemporary housing to the east of the site boundary. The site slopes downwards towards the south.

1.2 The site is a converted former church building which has been transformed into a residential dwelling featuring a split level layout. The rear of the dwelling features a timber staircase from the ground floor down to the lower ground floor (this was approved under PA 14/00573/B). It is located close to Minorca Hill, and mostly surrounded by trees and tall hedging. The finish is a mix of stone and painted stone render, with rosewood framed uPVC windows and a timber fire escape stairway leading from the patio doors at the rear

2.0 PROPOSAL - 2.1 The seeks approval for the alterations, erection of garden room with balcony deck area above. The proposal would have a rear projection from the southwest elevation of the building of 3.6m a width of 6.3m and a maximum height of (inc glass balustrading). - 2.2 This proposal follows a similar approved application (18/00866/B) for the installation of a new timber raised balcony deck to connect to the existing timber fire escape stair at the rear of Minorca Hill Chapel. This had a smaller footprint to what is proposed now, having a rear projection of 2,2m and a width of 7.8m.

3.0 PLANNING HISTORY - 3.1 The following previous planning applications are considered to be specifically material in the assessment of the current application: - 3.2 PA 93/01570/B Internal alterations and provision of new window - approved. - 3.3 PA 02/01886/B Installation of replacement hardwood windows, installation of French doors and creation of new window to east elevation - approved. - 3.4 PA 07/01229/B External alterations to dwelling - approved. - 3.5 PA 14/00573/B - Erection of an external fire escape staircase and installation of roof lights to dwelling - approved. - 3.6 PA 18/00866/B - Installation of timber raised balcony deck - approved.

4.0 PLANNING POLICY - 4.1 The application site is within an area zoned as "Predominantly Residential" identified in The Laxey and Lonan Area Plan Order 2005. - 4.2 Given the nature and location of the proposed development, it is important to consider General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016, which states that; "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."

4.3 Residential Design Guide July 2019 "SINGLE STOREY REAR EXTENSION

• 4.1.1 In relation to single storey extensions to the rear of the dwelling, generally the main issues relate to potential loss of light and/or overbearing impact upon the outlook of neighbouring properties. Extensions to terraced or semi-detached properties can have the potential for the greatest concern. With either type of property the depth (i.e. rear projection) of an extension and the position (near the shared boundary) are key in ensuring any such extension does not impinge on the amenities of neighbouring properties.

• 4.1.2 A "tunnelling effect" can be caused where windows are set back behind extensions projecting out either side. Ensuring an extension does not project too far from the rear of the house and/or setting an extension in from the boundary can help reduce problems of loss of daylight.
• 4.1.3 The acceptability of the length/depth of a single storey extension will depend on the positioning and size of neighbouring properties. For terraced houses and narrower semidetached properties, single storey extensions are unlikely to be supported where they project more than 3 metres from the back of the house."
• 4.4 "OVERLOOKING RESULTING IN A LOSS OF PRIVACY

• 7.0.1 The "20 metre guide" provides a useful way to identify where overlooking is likely to be a concern. It refers to the distance between elevations that contain windows serving habitable rooms that face each other - if this distance is over 20 metres, overlook is unlikely to be a concern. This distance can be relaxed where the design or orientation is such that privacy and amenity of a neighbouring property is not compromised. In dense urban areas where there is already a level of mutual overlooking a lesser standard may be acceptable. The required distance may need to be greater if there is a change in topography, which would result in an adverse effect on the privacy and amenity of a neighbouring property.
• 7.0.2 The presence of existing or proposed landscaping features (e.g. fences, walls and hedges) may help to mitigate overlooking at a ground floor level (depending on relative heights). Although the permanent retention of such landscaping cannot be guaranteed, it would be within the gift of both neighbours to retain/maintain/replace such landscape features."

5.0 REPRESENTATIONS - 5.1 Garff Commissioners have no objection (25.11.2019). - 5.2 Highway Services do not oppose (29.11.2019).

6.0 ASSESSMENT - 6.1 The key considerations in determining this application are:

• o The character and appearance of the site and surroundings
• o The impact on neighbours

6.2 The character and appearance of the site and surroundings

• 6.2.1 The dwelling on the site retains many of the traditional architectural features of the chapel and its appearance is integral and complimentary to the immediate area. Any exterior modifications must therefore be carefully assessed against the aforementioned criteria in GP2, to ensure that the character and appearance of both the building and the area are preserved.
• 6.2.2 The proposed rear single storey extension with balcony above would be more contemporary in style, with use of glazing and larch timber cladding. Its size and scale of the proposal is dwarfed by the existing main chapel building and being to the rear elevation will not be apparent from public views. Accordingly, while in terms of portion and form it cannot be said to match with the main chapel building, it is considered acceptable in this location and arguably an improvement over the previously approved balcony.
• 6.3 The impact on neighbours

• 6.3.1 Such a proposal would often give cause for concern with regard to overlooking and loss of privacy regarding neighbour amenity. Generally, a space of 20 metres is required to limit this. This proposal is situated over 24 metres from the nearest dwelling to the rear, though which layers of mature hedging and trees are located. This screening is likely to remain in some form in the long term, reducing any impact on overlooking into the rear of Hillcrest. Where any overlooking is likely to occur would be from the rear of 5 Lower Cronk Orry. Some increase in overlooking is possible, but minimal considering that no.5 sits higher the boundary

• area between the two properties. The distance is again sufficient so as to reduce this impact somewhat.
• 6.3.2 Additionally, the previously approved decking would have had a similar impact of what is now proposed and furthermore here are existing large patio doors and windows within the rear of the main chapel building which also have views towards neighbouring properties.
• 6.3.3 Accordingly, while the proposal would introduce a feature which would increase the level of overlooking, for the reasons indicated above it is not considered refusal of this current scheme is warranted.

7.0 CONCLUSION - 7.1 On balance, the proposal is regarded to comply with General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016, the Laxey and Lonan Local Plan 2005 and the Residential Design Guide July 2019 and is therefore recommended for approval.

8.0 INTERESTED PERSONS 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 a Principal Planner in accordance with the authority afforded to that Officer by the appropriate DEFA Delegation.

Decision Made : Permitted Date: 24.12.2019 Determining officer

Signed : S CORLETT Sarah Corlett 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.