DEC Officer Report

Application No.: 19/00354/B Applicant: Mr & Mrs Denis Duggan Proposal: Erection of single storey extension to side elevation Site Address: 23 Cooil Breryk Ramsey Isle Of Man IM8 3HL Planning Officer: Mr Nick Salt Photo Taken: 16.04.2019 Site Visit: 16.04.2019 Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 07.05.2019 _________________________________________________________________

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 permission relates to drawings SM/486/1 & SM19/486/2 , date stamped received on 27th March 2019. _______________________________________________________________

Interested Person Status – Additional Persons

None _____________________________________________________________________________

Officer’s Report

1.0 SITE - 1.1 The application site is the residential curtilage of 23 Cooil Breryk in Ramsey, a detached bungalow in a typical 1970's style residential culdesac. The site is at the end of the culdesac, and the dwelling features a shallow pitched roof with porch extension to the south side elevation and a flat roofed garage adjoined to the north side elevation. The garage sits some 1.4m closer to the road than the front elevation of the main dwelling. There is garden space to the rear and south side. Number 23 is unique in that it sits much further back from the roadside than the neighbouring dwellings (approximately 10m more). The existing finish is dash render.

- 2.0 THE PROPOSAL

2.1 Proposed is the erection of a single storey side extension on the property. The flat roofed extension would sit behind the existing flat roofed garage when viewed from the road. The additional floor space would be around 20.8 metres providing an additional bedroom and kitchen area. There would be two additional windows created, similar to the large windows which are currently in place, one to the rear and one to the side (north facing No.21). The flat roof would sit level with the eaves of the main dwelling pitched roof, slightly above that of the existing flat roofed garage.

3.0 PLANNING POLICY - 3.1 The proposal site is situated in an area covered by the Ramsey Local Plan 1998. Within this plan it is zoned as Predominantly Residential (Map 1, North). - 3.2 The Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 sets out some general policies which should be considered when assessing an application in an area zoned as such. General Policy 2 (in part) is key to this application; "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."

3.3 Paragraph 8.12.1 of the Strategic Plan (IOMSP) is also useful when it comes to assessing this application: "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."

4.0 PLANNING HISTORY - 4.1 There is no planning history on file for this site.

5.0 REPRESENTATIONS - 5.1 Ramsey Town Commissioners have no objection to the application (23.04.19) - 5.2 DoI Highways have stated that there is no highway interest (16.04.19).

6.0 ASSESSMENT - 6.1 The key considerations in the assessment of this application are the potential impacts of the proposal on the character and appearance of the site dwelling and wider street scene, and the amenity of the neighbours. - 6.2 Character and Appearance

• 6.2.1 Within relatively modern residential estates such as this one, flat roofed single storey extensions are often acceptable provided that they remain secondary to the main dwelling especially when viewed from the road. In this case, when viewed from Cooil Breryk, the extension would be partly hidden behind No.21 but almost entirely hidden behind the existing flat roofed garage. The rood would protrude slightly above, however this would not be a highly noticeable feature - particularly as the site dwelling is set back quite a bit from the road. The use of dash render to match the existing would ensure that the extension appears as congruous to the dwelling. Overall, in terms of appearance, any noticeable impact would be minimal and the proposal would comply with GP2 in this regard.

6.3 Neighbour Amenity

• 6.3.1 It is also important to assess any potential loss of amenity from the perspective of neighbours, in this case No.21 and 15 are the properties regarded as most likely to be affected.

Referring to the recently published DEFA Residential Design Guidance (March 2019), the main considerations around this would be loss of privacy and overlooking - particularly on dwellings or gardens within 20 metres of the extension, overbearing and loss of outlook, and overshadowing. Due to the single storey height and the positioning of the extension relative to the main dwelling and the neighbouring dwellings, there would be no loss of amenity from overshadowing or loss of light, or from loss of outlook.

• 6.3.2 When assessing any overlooking from the proposed new rear window, there are no properties within 30 of the line of sight from the window, with several boundary treatments in between. Views from the side window created would be from the kitchen looking towards No's 21 and 15. To 15, two boundaries are between the properties, as is around 15m of distance - thus reducing any impact. Similarly, there is significant hedging between 23 and 21, and whilst this is not necessarily permanent or reliable as a screening, its presence is mutually beneficial to both dwellings privacy. Furthermore, the low level of the window in a single storey extension would limit the overlooking - if there were any in the future, it would be mutual, as noted. Overall, the proposal complies with GP2.
• 7.0 CONCLUSION

7.1 In summary, this extension would fit with the existing style and fabric of the dwelling and would not have a negative impact on the wider street scene of Cooil Breryk, nor would there be an unacceptable loss of neighbour's residential amenity as a result. The proposal is in accordance with the land use designation and GP2 of the Strategic Plan and is recommended for approval on that basis. - 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 : 07.05.2019 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.