Loading document...
Application No.: 24/00288/B Applicant: Miss Natalie Radford Proposal: 2 Single Storey extensions to South East Elevation 1 Single Storey Extension to South West elevation Ground floor extension under existing canopy roof Site Address: 1 The Courtyard Tromode Road Douglas Isle Of Man IM2 5EJ Planning Officer: Hamish Laird Photo Taken: 05.05.2024 Site Visit: 05.05.2024 Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 08.08.2024
C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions
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.
Thereafter, all such fixtures and fittings shall be retained and maintained for the lifetime of the development.
Reason: The site lies within a High Risk Flood Zone, and these details are required to mitigate against the potential risk of flooding.
carried out on site. The protective fencing shall remain in situ until the extensions first come into operation.
Reason: To reduce the risk of ground compaction and contamination and to properly protect the rooting area of this T1 Beech tree subject to the approval of the Arboriculture Officer at DEFA Forestry, in the interests of visual amenity and biodiversity.
This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason.
Overall it is concluded that the planning application is acceptable and accords with the provisions set out in Policies GP2 b, c, and g; and, ENV1, 3, 10, 22 and 23, of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016, and is recommended for approval.
Plans/Drawings/Information; The development shall be carried out in accordance with the Drawings and details stamped received and dated 13 March 2024, unless otherwise stated:
Additional Persons
It is recommended that the following Government Departments should be given Interested Person Status on the basis that they have made written submissions these do relate to planning considerations:
Flood Management Division (DOI) _____________________________________________________________________________
1.0 The Site - 1.1 The site comprises an existing 1 ½ storey, detached dwelling of white painted pebbledash/render walls, with black wooden detailing (pargetting) at first floor level on the end gables. It is housed under a natural slate roof and has an open veranda/covered decked area on its north-west side. It has 2 No. dormer windows in the south-west roof slope - both serving en-suite bathrooms - and one in the north-east roof slope located above the front entrance door serving a study. The dwelling has a flat-roofed, single storey sun-lounge attached to its south-east elevation which is lit by a large roof lantern. - 1.2 The dwelling stands within a spacious plot, set back from Tromode Road, on the western central side of Douglas. It is served by a shared vehicular access (with No. 2, The Courtyard) directly from Tromode Road. To the west the site abuts a wooded area adjoining open countryside, whilst in all other direction the surroundings are predominantly residential. A mature Beech tree is locate on site close to the area of the proposed development.
2.0 The Proposals - 2.1 The full planning application proposes the erection of 2 Single Storey extensions to the South East Elevation; 1 Single Storey Extension to the South West elevation; and, a ground floor extension under the existing canopy roof serving the open veranda/covered decked area. - 2.2 The 2 Single Storey extensions to the South East Elevation involve the addition of a Study Room (approx. 5.4m wide x 4.0m deep). on the SW side of the Sun Lounge; and, a Utility Room on the NE side of the Sun Room (approx. 4.94m wide x 2.7m deep). Their flat roofs would both have heights that would match that of the sun lounge at approx. 2.76m.
2.3 The Single Storey Extension proposed to be attached to the South West elevation of the dwelling would measure approx. 5.85m side x 3.6m deep. It too, would be housed under a flat roof that would have a matching height of approx. 2.76m. It would provide an extension to the existing double bedroom. A reconfiguration of the existing dressing area, and en-suite shower room, would provide for an enlarged dressing room and en-suite bathroom serving the bedroom. - 2.4 The third element of the proposals comprises the addition of a ground floor extension under the existing canopy roof serving the open veranda/covered decked area. There would be no increase in footprint/floor-space, other than the decked area would be enclosed under a pitched roof with eaves and ridge height to match that of the existing dwelling. This would provide an extension to the existing lounge. - 2.5 The extensions would be constructed from matching materials. - 2.6 The applicant on 16/4/24 provided the following information as a Flood Risk Assessment (FRA):
"Please consider this email as a Flood Risk Assessment for the above application. The application is for modest extensions to an existing dwelling. The flood level of the existing dwelling and the extensions are equal.
The site is No 1 The Courtyard one of 4 detached houses all in the same family ownership. The 4 properties Stovell, The Lodge, No 1 The Courtyard and No 2 The Courtyard. Stovell was constructed in the mid 1980's, The Lodge 1989, No 1 The Courtyard in 2007 and No 2 The Courtyard in 2011. The family have confirmed that at no point since occupation of any of the dwelling have they been subject to flooding. The general island wide flooding experienced on Tuesday 9th April 2024, had no impact on the application site, the other family dwellings. We attach a topographical survey of the site and 2 of the above mentioned dwellings undertaken to using Douglas 02 Datum. This Drawing indicates the following relevant levels:
Water Level 17.63m The Lodge 2.43 GFL
By virtue of the fact that the floor level of the application site is 3.22m above river level and between 400 mm and 420mm above the floor levels of nearby properties and that there is no history of flooding in any of the properties we suggest that there is no additional risk of flooding of the proposed extensions to the dwelling.
We cannot anticipate any flood mitigation measures being required for extensions to a previously unaffected property."
3.0 Planning History - 3.1 12/00886/B - Extension to dwelling - Permitted - 26.07.2012. Planning Policy
4.1 The site lies within the settlement boundary for Douglas in a 'Predominantly Residential' area as shown on both Proposals Map 4 'Douglas' and Proposals Map 8 'Union Mills/Strang' in the Area Plan for the East 2020.
4.2 The site is not in a Conservation Area and none of the buildings on site are Registered. It is, however, located in a High Flood Risk Area in respect of the potential for surface water flooding. There is a mature Beech tree on site in an area close to the position of the proposed development. - 4.3 As such, the following parts of the Strategic Plan are relevant:
General Policy 2: "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:
4.4 Environment Policy 3: "Development will not be permitted where it would result in the unacceptable loss of or damage to woodland areas, especially ancient, natural and semi-natural woodlands, which have public amenity or conservation value." - 4.5 Environment Policy 10: "Where development is proposed on any site where in the opinion of the Department of Local Government and the Environment there is a potential risk of flooding, a flood risk assessment and details of proposed mitigation measures must accompany any application for planning permission. The requirements for a flood risk assessment are set out in Appendix 4." - 4.6 Environment Policy 22 (in part): Development will not be permitted where it would unacceptably harm the environment and/or the amenity of nearby properties in terms of: (iii) vibration, odour, noise or light pollution; - 4.7 Environment Policy 23:
"When considering alterations and improvements to existing facilities the Department will require that consideration be given to the potential adverse impact of the proposed changes to existing neighbours."
5.1 Douglas Borough Council comments (27/3/24): 'This development must not prohibit the refuse bins from being removed from the highway to be stored within the curtilage of the property between refuse collections.' - 5.2 FRMD (27/3/24/) comments: "The proposed building works are in a flood zone and FRM would like to see a flood risk assessment explaining all flood mitigation measures to be undertaken before making any comment." Recommendation: Defer. - 5.3 Further to discussions between the applicant and FRMD, the applicant advised in an email dated 26/7/24 of the following by way of flood mitigation measures:
In relation to our telephone conversation of this afternoon I write to confirm that the following measures will be incorporated into the final design
5.4 FRMD (8/8/24) - Further comments:
Following discussions with the applicant FRMD agreed that the measured outlined in the applicants email of 26/7/24, were acceptable and withdrew their objection.
5.5 DEFA Arboricultural Officer comments (8/4/24):
"I would like to submit the following comments in relation to application 24/00288/B - 1 The Courtyard, Tromode Road, Douglas on behalf of the Agriculture and Lands Directorate of DEFA.
T1 is a high quality beech tree. The proposal has a low risk of damaging the tree from direct excavation as the proposed works are all located outside of the favourable rooting environment of the tree. It would still be beneficial, however, to include a construction exclusion zone to reduce the risk of ground compaction and contamination. The proposed CEZ is currently inadequate to properly protect the rooting area of the tree as it is only covering the extent of the canopy. To properly protect the rooting area of this tree, I would suggest the CEZ is amended as per the attached images, the red line indicates the position of the fencing. Should these amendments be made, I would have no objection to the proposal."
6.1 The fundamental issues to consider in the assessment of this planning application are:
6.2 The proposed works involve the erection of 2 Single Storey extensions to the South East Elevation; 1 Single Storey Extension to the South West elevation; and, a ground floor extension under the existing canopy roof serving the open veranda/covered decked area. This latter element, which would provide an extension to the living room, would involve no increase in footprint/floor-space. These involve the addition of a Study Room on the SW side of the Sun Lounge; a Utility Room; an extension to the existing double bedroom; and, the addition of a ground floor extension under the existing canopy roof serving the open veranda/covered decked area. The site is contained by an approx. 1.8m high (Max.), white painted pebbledash walling on its south-western boundary adjoining the neighbouring dwelling at Stovell located to the rear of the site, and from 2 The Courtyard located immediately to the north west of the site. It is further screened by mature hedging on the south-western and north-western boundaries, the latter which fronts Tromode Road, is also screened by a low (approx. 1.0m high) Manx stone boundary wall. - 6.3 It is considered that the location of the extensions on the sides and rear of the dwelling within an existing residential area would result in a limited visual impact on the character of the
site and surrounding area. It is considered that the design, side and rearward extent from the existing dwelling, and the scale and proportions of the proposed extensions, are acceptable. Overall, in terms of visual impact, the proposed extensions would accord with the provisions of Policy (GP2 b and c) in the Adopted Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.
6.4 The proposed ground floor extensions would be sited on the rear and sides of the existing dwelling and in terms of their orientation in relation to the neighbouring dwelling at Stovell, would be sited to the north-west of the side elevation of this neighbouring property, which is screened by the boundary walling; and, from the neighbouring dwelling to the northwest at 2 The Courtyard, which has its garage sited closest to No. 1 and which provides a degree of screening in addition to the boundary wall between the two dwellings. This would avoid any loss of daylight to the rear of this neighbouring dwelling as the sun tracks round on a southern arc on its daily journey across the sky. The depth, height, scale, and proximity of the extensions in relation to these neighbouring dwellings is considered to be acceptable in that they would not result in an unacceptable loss of light to, or outlook from either of these neighbouring dwelling; nor, should they appear as overbearing when viewed from the confines of either adjoining plot. Overall, the proposed extensions are considered to have an acceptable impact on the amenities of the occupants of the neighbouring dwellings at Lovell and No. 2 The Courtyard. No other nearby dwellings would be affected by the proposed development. - 6.5 It is considered that the proposed ground floor extensions to serve No. 1 The Courtyard, are acceptable and accord with the provisions of Policies GP2 g; and, ENV22iii) in the Adopted Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.
6.6 The comments received from the Arboriculture Officer (AO) regarding the potential Impact on the T1 high quality beech tree, are noted. The AO advised that the proposal has a low risk of damaging the tree from direct excavation as the proposed works are all located outside of the favourable rooting environment of the tree. It is considered that a revised plan showing the re-alignment of the CEZ to reduce the risk of ground compaction and contamination to properly protect the rooting area of this tree, as per the images provided by the AO showing the red line indicating the position of the fencing can be conditioned. On this basis, the AO would have no objection to the proposal, and it is considered that this would afford adequate protection to the Beech tree. - 6.7 This would accord with the provisions of Policy ENV4 of the IOMSP 2016, and the proposed development is acceptable in this regard.
6.8 Following receipt of the consultation response from FRMD, the applicant has been in discussions with FRMD and has provided an update to the FRA and proposed mitigation measures to assist should a flood event occur which affects the site. The applicant has agreed "that the following measures will be incorporated within the final design:
6.9 There are no highway implications or objections to the proposals from DoI Highways. The existing access would be used and there is sufficient parking space on site to serve the proposed development. This accords with Policies ENV4 and ENV7 in the IOMSP 2016.
7.1 For the above reasons, it is concluded that the development proposed by this planning application in terms of its design and visual impact is acceptable, and impact on the Beech tree on site is acceptable. It would not harm the residential amenities of occupants of neighbouring properties and would comply with the principles of General Policy 2, and Environment Policies
3, 10, 22 and 23 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016, and is recommended for approval.
8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019, the following persons are automatically interested persons:
8.2 The decision maker must determine:
8.3 The Department of Environment Food and Agriculture is responsible for the determination of planning applications. As a result, where officers within the Department make comments in a professional capacity they cannot 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 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: 09.08.2024 Determining officer
Signed : C BALMER Chris Balmer 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.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
