DEC Officer Report

PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Application No.: 24/00394/B Applicant: Mr & Mrs David & Rachel Thomas Proposal: Orangery extension to replace existing conservatory & summerhouse including installation of 2no air sourced heat pumps and 2no air conditioning units externally Site Address: Deansgate Lucerne Court Douglas Isle Of Man IM2 6BJ Planning Officer: Vanessa Porter Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 19.07.2024

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 26 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.

• C 2. The Air Source Heat Pumps and Air Conditioning Units must be installed according to the plans and supporting information and must be maintained as such thereafter.

Reason: To ensure the development is implemented according to the plan/details submitted, as the Department has assessed the impact of the proposal on the basis of the specific use and the documents submitted.

• C 3. Obscure glazing (Pilkington level 5 or equivalent) shall be installed in the following window/s and shall be maintained as such thereafter;

East Elevation - Ground Floor Orangery

Reason: In terms interests of neighbouring residential amenities.

This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason.

On balance the proposal as a whole is deemed to be acceptable from a character and appearance point of view and is judged not to harm the neighbouring amenity of No.10 Montreux Court nor No.7 Lucerne Court above and beyond what is currently in place. As such the proposal is deemed to comply with General Policy 2, Environment Policy 4 and Environment Policy 22.

Plans/Drawings/Information;

This decision relates to the following plans and drawings, date stamped received on 2nd April 2024;

• o Drawing No. 1A
• o Drawing No. 3

This decision also relates to the ASHP and Air Conditioning Unit calculations and drawing No. 4A dated received 16th April 2024. This decision also relates to drawing No. 2B dated received 12th June 2024. _______________________________________________________________ Interested Person Status – Additional Persons

It is recommended that the owners/occupiers of the following properties should be given Interested Person Status as they are considered to have sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings and are not mentioned in Article 4(2):

10 Montreux Court, Douglas as they satisfy all of the requirements of paragraph 2 of the Department's Operational Policy on Interested Person Status. _____________________________________________________________________________

Officer’s Report THE APPLICATION SITE

1.1 The application site is within the residential curtilage of Deansgate, Lucerne Court, Douglas, which is a two storey detached property situated to the Northern side of Lucerne Court which is a three way cul-de-sac, with the application site being situated within the Eastern side. - 1.2 To the Western side of the property is the driveway for the property situated to the rear (Fairhaven). The overall streetscene where the proposed property is situated is high walling to the front of the properties, to the Northern side the properties are large with small gardens and to the other sides the properties are large with large gardens. - 1.3 Due to the orientation of the properties is the streetscene, there is some overlooking from the windows in the application site and the neighbouring properties. It should also be noted that Fairhaven, the property situated to the rear of the site is situated at a higher level than the application site and No. 9 & 10 Montreux Court are situated to a lower level than the application site. - 1.4 There is a decorative red brick wall to approximately a metre high and mature hedging situated to the Eastern side of the property, a high red brick wall, due to the ground level being higher on the driveway side than the application site side, situated to Western elevation and during the officers site visit there was no boundary wall situated to the Northern side as works has started on the property.

THE PROPOSAL

2.1 The current planning application seeks approval to demolish the existing conservatory and erect a single storey L shaped flat roofed extension to the Eastern side of the property. The proposed extension is to measure approximately 8m by approximately 12.2 m with an overall approximate height of 2.9m. Three rooflights measuring 1.5m by 3m are proposed within the extension. - 2.2 The proposed materials of the extension have not been provided. - 2.3 Also proposed is the installation of two Air Source Heat Pumps and two Air Conditioning units which are to be situated to the Western side of site, adjacent to the driveway to Fairhaven. PLANNING HISTORY

3.1 The following are relevant applications upon the site;

• 3.1.1 PA05/02013/B - Amendment to previously approved dwelling (03/01688B) to form a triple garage - Permitted
• 3.1.2 PA17/01087/B - Single storey extension to rear of property - Permitted
• 3.1.3 PA24/00007/B - Dining room extension at rear of property (revision to previously approved PA 17/01087/B) - Permitted
• 3.1.4 PA24/00323/B - Erection of a garden room to the rear of the property - Pending.
• 3.1.5 PA24/00488/B - Erection of two Bay window extensions with roof balconies above to front elevation - Pending. PLANNING POLICY

4.1 The site lies within an area zoned as Predominantly Residential on the Area Plan for the East, Map 4 - Douglas. The site is not situated within a Conservation Area nor a Flood Risk Zone.

4.2 When looking at the proposal, it can be split into two sections first the proposed extension and secondly the proposed ASHP and Air conditioning units.

4.3 With regards to the proposed extension, given the nature of the residential property and the land designation paragraph 8.12.1 and General Policy 2 from the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 are most relevant to its assessment which set out the general standards towards acceptable development. The recently released Residential Design Guidance 2021 is also a material consideration particularly those parts in respect of good neighbourliness and overlooking. Furthermore, consideration shall also be given to Community Policies 7 and 11 in respect of reducing outbreak of fire and preventing criminal activity and Infrastructure Policy 5 in respect of water conservation. - 4.4 With regards to the ASHP's and air conditioning units, paragraph 12.2.8, of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan is applicable and states, "The Department is fully supportive of the need to secure greater energy efficiency in new and existing development and has recently introduced additional energy efficiency requirements in the Building Regulations 2003. Energy efficiency and the use of renewable energy sources are covered in General Policy 2(m) of the Building Regulations. At the same time the Department recognizes that renewable energy sources can

• have adverse environmental impacts. The idea of a wind turbine Installation is currently being investigated and considered by the Manx Electricity Authority. Any feasible site is likely to be exposed and have considerable visual impact. There may also be other impacts such as noise. On a smaller scale, the popularity of domestic wind turbines has been increasing in recent years in response to rising energy prices and increasing awareness of climate change. Planning applications for domestic wind turbines are unlikely to require the submission of an Environmental Impact Assessment. The Department will assess any proposals for wind turbine installations by weighing the benefits of using such renewable energy sources against the environmental impact arising in any particular site. It is likely that the visual impact would be less detrimental on a coastal site than on a rural or upland one."
• 4.5 Accordingly it is required to assess Energy Policy 4 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016, which states: "Development involving alternative sources of energy supply, including wind, water and tide power, and the use of solar panels, will be judged against the environmental objectives and policies set out in this Plan. Installations involving wind, water and tide power will require the submission of an EIA." This is then followed by General Policy 2, which sets out general 'Development Control' considerations of which the relevant parts for this application would be where the proposed ASHP would adversely affect the character of the area, the possible impact on the neighbouring amenity of the closest neighbours and the wider environment, and Environment Policy 22 which seeks to protect the environment and quality of life of neighbouring properties. REPRESENTATIONS

5.1 The following representations can be found in full online, below is a short summary.

5.1 Highway Services have considered the application and state, "No Highways Interest." (12.04.24).

5.2 Douglas Corporation have considered the application and state "No Objections." (19.04.24) - 5.3 Kinrade Associates have written in on behalf of No.10 Montreux Court, who have raised objections to the proposal on the basis of overlooking. ASSESSMENT

6.1 The main issues to consider in the assessment of this planning application are: Extension

• - Character and appearance
• - neighbouring amenity
• - other matters ASHP & Air Conditioning Units
• - Principle
• - Character and appearance
• - living conditions of those in adjacent properties.

- 6.2 EXTENSION - CHARACTER AND APPEARANCE

• 6.2.1 There is a general presumption in favour of extensions or alterations to existing properties as per Paragraph 8.12.1 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan, where such works would not have an adverse impact on either adjacent properties or the surrounding area in general.
• 6.2.2 When looking at the proposed works, the properties within Lucerne Court are all based on the basic same appearance, abide they do each have slight differences. It is also noted that

• the proposed property is situated to the end of the cul-de-sac, which due to the location of the property and the mature hedging to the front elevation, it is unlikely that the proposed extension would have an impact upon the overall streetscene, nor the property itself, with the extension being read within the residential context of the property and surrounding streetscene.
• 6.2.3 Overall whilst the proposal will be introducing a larger built form, in terms of size and height and the general appearance it is considered proportionate to the rear elevation and designed to serve that specific purpose for a habitable extension. The inclusion of the flat roof whilst not matching the existing dwelling is acceptable and assists the extension in remain subservient to the dwellinghouse.
• 6.2.4 These aspects of development are deemed to be an acceptable form of development that complies with those sections of General Policy 2(b) & (c).

- 6.3 EXTENSION - NEIGHBOURING AMENITY

• 6.3.1 Turning towards whether the proposal would have an impact on neighbouring amenity of the closest neighbours to the works, which would be No.10 Montreux Court. The proposal is bringing the extension 3.8m closer to the boundary line between the properties, with there being one high level window facing onto No.10 Montreux Court.
• 6.3.2 It could be seen during the officers site visit, that the boundary between the properties was a low level wall and mature hedging above, with depending on where you stood views into No.10 Montreux Court's rear garden and also into the first floor. As such with the above in mind it is deemed that the proposal would not create any additional perceived or actual overlooking above and beyond what is already in place.

- 6.4 EXTENSION - OTHER MATTERS

• 6.4.1 The proposed works are an extension to an already existing property, as such the proposal is not expected to create any changes or new issues in respect of criminal actively or spread of fire. The proposal whilst increasing the surface area of the dwelling, any water runoff will be dealt with as per the existing arrangement of the main dwelling. The proposed extension will not increase water usage of the dwelling and therefore there are no new issues in this respect.

6.5 ASHP & AIR CONDITIONING UNITS - PRINCIPLE

• 6.5.1 When looking at the principle of the proposal the Strategic Plan and the Climate Change Strategy Bill encourages the provision of renewable energy of which Air Source Heat Pumps would be within this, as such the proposed ASHP would be supported within GP2 and EP4 and is considered acceptable in principle.

6.6 CHARACTER AND APPEARANCE

• 6.6.1 The proposed ASHP's and Air Conditioning Units are to be situated to the West of the site, on the side of the property, just below the driveway boundary wall to Fairhaven, which is situated at the rear of the dwelling. As such the ASHP and Air conditioning units will be hidden from a public vantage point and would minimally affect the character and appearance of the area and is deemed acceptable.

6.7 LIVING CONDITIONS OF THOSE IN ADJACENT PROPERTIES

• 6.7.1 When looking at potential noise impact, the sound pressure level of the proposed heat pump is expected to be between 45-58 dBA. When putting this into retrospect similar noise

generated by light traffic comes in at 50dB, 60dB is noise impact of a normal conversation or a washing machine. Whilst everyone is different most people will not be annoyed by activities with LAeg levels below 55dB, however sound pressure levels during the evening and night should be 5-10 dB lower than during the day.

• 6.7.2 During the night an air source heat pump could potentially be a noise nuisance, especially due to background noise levels being lower. The World Health Organisation (WHO) has guidance for noise and the disturbance it can cause and states that both continuous and intermittent noise can lead to sleep disturbances and the more intense the background noise the, the more disturbing is its effect on sleep with the measurable effects on sleep starting at a background noise level of about 30 dB LAeq.

• 6.7.3 The WHO guidelines further state that, "In dwellings, the critical effects of noise are on sleep, annoyance and speech interference. To avoid sleep disturbance, indoor guideline values for bedrooms are 30 dB LAeq for continuous noise and 45 dB LAmax for single sound events. Lower levels may be annoying, depending on the nature of the noise source….. At night, sound pressure levels at the outside façades of the living spaces should not exceed 45 dB LAeq and 60 dB LAmax, so that people may sleep with bedroom windows open. These values have been obtained by assuming that the noise reduction from outside to inside with the window partly open is 15 dB."

• 6.7.4 The Permitted Development Amendment Order 2020 states, "LAeq 5 mins means the A weighted equivalent continuous sound pressure level over 5 minutes when measured at 1 metre external to the centre point of any relevant door or window to any neighbouring building as measured perpendicular to the plane of the relevant door or window." To better understand what the LAeq 5 mins for the neighbouring property would be guidance was sought from the English and Scottish Permitted Development which must comply with the conditions within the Microgeneration Certification Scheme Planning Standards (MCS020).
• 6.7.5 The applicant has filled in the MCS020 assessment which is used to ascertain what the dB(A) would be for the closest assessment position which for assessing this application, is the first floor dormer window within the garage of No. 7 Lucerne Court, of which the final figure is 42dB(A). This falls within the maximum permitted noise level of 42 dB allowed under permitted development in accordance with the Town and Country Planning (Permitted Development) Order 2012 in relation to the equivalent continuous sound pressure level over 5 minutes when measured at 1 metre external to the centre point of any relevant door or window to any neighbouring building as measured perpendicular to the plane of that relevant door or window. This threshold also aligns with the Microgeneration Installation Standard: MCS 020 planning standards document produced in tandem with relevant UK governmental departments. CONCLUSION

7.1 Overall with regards to the proposed single storey flat roofed extension whilst adding a larger built form to the dwelling, the proposal is deemed acceptable from a character and appearance point of view and is judged not to harm the neighbouring amenity of No.10 Montreux Court above and beyond what is currently in place. Therefore the extension is deemed to comply with General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan. - 7.2 The proposed ASHP would accord with General Policy 2(n) in respect of non-renewable energy consumption and the general support in the Strategic Plan for the installation of renewable energy installations as set out in Environment Policy 4, whilst working with the Climate Change Strategy Bill. There will be a background noise generated from the unit but it's expected that the noise levels and impact will be low and not likely to have a detrimental impact on the living conditions or amenity of No.7 Lucerne Court.

7.3 The proposed Air Conditioning units are deemed acceptable from a Character and Appearance point of view and whilst there will be a background noise generated from the unit, it's expected that the noise levels and impact will be low and not likely to have a detrimental impact on the living conditions or amenity of No.7 Lucerne Court. - 7.4 The proposal as a whole is recommended for approval. INTERESTED PERSON STATUS

- 8.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS

8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019, the following persons are automatically interested persons:

• (a) the applicant (including an agent acting on their behalf);
• (b) any Government Department that has made written representations that the Department considers material;
• (c) the Highways Division of the Department of Infrastructure;
• (d) Manx National Heritage where it has made written representations that the Department considers material;
• (e) Manx Utilities where it has made written representations that the Department considers material;
• (f) the local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated; and
• (g) a local authority adjoining the authority referred to in paragraph (f) where that adjoining authority has made written representations that the Department considers material.

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 above who should be given Interested Person Status.

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: 24.07.2024 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.