Officer Report

PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Application No.: 24/91228/B Applicant: Mr & Mrs Jack & Becky Bladon Proposal: External alterations and extensions including first floor extension over existing garage, replacement rear dormer window, front extension with porch, rear pergola, and changes to external finishes. Site Address: 9 Raad Ny Gabbil Castletown Isle Of Man IM9 1HH Senior Planning Officer: Jason Singleton Photo Taken: 05.12.2024 Site Visit: 05.12.2024 Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 13.03.2025 _________________________________________________________________

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. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Permitted Development) Order 2012 (or any Order revoking and/or re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no development shall be undertaken under the following classes of Schedule 1 of the Order at any time:

• Class 14 - Extension of dwellinghouse
• Class 15 - Garden sheds and summer-houses Class 17 - Private garages and car ports Class 26 - Garage doors Reason: To control future development on the site.

• C 3. Prior to the commencement of any works hereby approved, a schedule of materials and finishes and samples or trade literature of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces, including roofs, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Department. The development shall not be carried out unless strictly in accordance with those approved details.

Reason: In the interests of the character and appearance of the site and surrounding area and to ensure the architectural detailing is installed as per the proposals.

• C 4. The garage hereby approved shall at all times be made available for the parking of private motor vehicles(s) and shall be retained available for such use. Reason: To provide adequate parking provision to the dwellinghouse.
• C 5. The roof(s) hereby approved must be finished in a dark brown colour which has first been approved in writing by the Department and retained as such thereafter.

Reason: To ensure a suitable finish to the proposed roof is inkeeping with the character of the streetscene.

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

The planning application would not harm the use and enjoyment of neighbouring properties and has been designed to just about comply with General Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.

Plans/Drawings/Information; This decision relates to drawings and information received on 28th October referenced;

- 10-00 - 10-01A 10-02C 12-00A 12-01C

_________________________________________________________________ Right to Appeal

It is recommended that the following organisations should NOT be given the Right to Appeal: DoI - Highways Services - No objection

It is recommended that the owners/occupiers of the following properties should be given the Right to Appeal as they have submitted an objection that meets the specified criteria: 8 Raad Ny Gabbil, Castletown

_________________________________________________________________ Officer’s Report

1.0 THE SITE - 1.1 The application site is the residential curtilage of No. 9 Raad Ny Gabbil, Castletown. The property sits to the south of the highway and is characterised as chalet style detached dwelling with pitched tiled roof and a flat roofed dormer to the rear roofscape. Attached to the south elevation is a flat roofed garage. Properties to the south of the highway back onto Arbory Road. - 1.2 The site sits within a wider residential estate and is broadly accessed from Arbory Road. This section of the estate road is approx. 170m long terminating in a cul-de-sac to the north and a grassed public open space, play area at the turning head. The properties here are numbered 1-10 to the west of the highway and 11-20 to the east. - 1.3 The property is relatively unaltered since its initial construction and is finishes in a spar dash render with chimney stacks on each gable and gable windows at first floor level. This property is typical of the character of the residential area which are predominately detached 1970's dormer bungalows, notably a steeply pitched tiled roof and an attached flat roof garages. These dwelling houses are of various forms and sizes, some with gables facing the highway and some being side on.

2.0 THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 Proposed are a series of external alterations to the property that would see a remodelling of both the front and rear elevations to modernise its appearance. The scope of works would see a first floor extension over existing flat roofed garage, replacement larger rear dormer, and front extension with porch, rear pergola, and changes to external finishes. - 2.2 The proposals would also see the integration of an Air Source Heat pump adjacent to the garage, the installation of internal Mechanical Heat Ventilation Recovery Unit, Electric vehicle charging point and 4 x 2m square photovoltaic solar panels on the side gable end of the property linked to internal battery storage. - 2.3 The agent has concludes in their design statement; "the proposed renovation and external alterations to 9 Raad Ny Gabbil are designed to modernise a 1970s dormer bungalow while remaining sympathetic to its surroundings. The scheme integrates sustainable practices, energy-efficient upgrades, and thoughtful architectural enhancements to create a contemporary, comfortable, and environmentally responsible home. By focusing on optimising space, improving building performance, and adhering to local planning policies, the design meets the client's needs while enhancing the visual appeal of the area. The minimal impact on neighbouring properties further supports the proposal's approval".

3.0 PLANNING POLICY - 3.1 In terms of local plan policy, the application site is within an area recognised as being predominately residential use under the Area Plan for the South Map 5 Castletown. - 3.2 The site is not within a conservation area. There are no registered trees within the site that are of concern. - 3.3 The site is shown flood maps show a minor risk of surface flooding but only affecting a small part of the rear garden and not the property.

3.3 The Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 contains the following policies that are considered specifically material to the assessment of this application; Strategic Policy

• 2 Priority for new development to identified towns and villages
• 3 To respect the character of our towns and villages 5 Design and visual impact

Spatial Policy 2 Castletown is defined as a Service Centre General Policy 2 General Development Considerations Environment Policy 42 Designed to respect the character and identity of the locality

3.4 Paragraph 8.12.1 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 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." - 3.5 Residential Design Guide (2021)

This document provides advice on the design of new houses and extensions to existing property as well as how to assess the impact of such development on the living conditions of those in adjacent residential properties and sustainable methods of construction.

4.0 PLANNING HISTORY - 4.1 The application site has not been subject to any pervious planning applications, however within the streetscene that are a number of properties that have been extended in recent years, which involved material alterations to the properties, predominately rear extensions referenced;

• o 23/00643/B - 13 Raad Ny Gabbil - Erection of single storey extension off rear elevation.
• o 22/00211/B - 16 Raad Ny Gabbil - Rear extension and first floor rear extension with associated internal alterations.
• o 21/00177/B - 8 Raad Ny Gabbil - Alterations and erection of an extension.
• o 18/00085/B - 3 Raad Ny Gabbil - Alterations, erection of a two storey side extension, installation of four front elevation roof lights and four rear dormer windows and formation of a sun room from existing rear conservatory
• o 17/00148/B - 13 Raad Ny Gabbil - Erection of single storey extension and creation of dormer window.
• o 14/00533/B - 10 Raad Ny Gabbil - Erection of extension to rear elevation.
• o 08/02259/B - 2 Raad Ny Gabbil - Alterations and erection of first floor extension to rear elevation.

5.0 REPRESENTATIONS - 5.1 Castletown Commissioners has not commented at the time of writing despite being notified of the application on 22/11/24. - 5.2 Highways Services commented (25/11/24) with no objection. Neighbour Comments - 5.3 8 Raad Ny Gabbil, Objected (20/12/24) "Unfortunately we object because the extension over the garage is directly adjacent to our child's bedroom window, which will lead to a significant loss of light."

- 6.0 ASSESSMENT

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

• - Principle of development (SP2, STP2)
• - Design and visual impact (STP3,5, GP2b,c, EP42)
• - Impact upon neighbouring amenity (GP2g)

PRINCIPLE

6.2 The site falls within the existing settlement boundary of Castletown and an area zoned for residential development, and principally would be in accordance with SP2 and STP2. In terms of large rear extensions that incorporate flat roof designs that benefit from approvals are noted earlier on in this report and there is a general presumption in favour of extensions to existing properties (para 8.12.1 of the Strategic Plan) and provided such development would not have an adverse impact on either adjacent properties or the surrounding area, as assessed below. DESIGN AND VISUAL IMPACT - 6.3 In terms of visual appearance, the most notable aspect of the proposal would be the first floor extension above the existing flat roof garage, essentially following the existing roof profile. This aspect twinned with the re-roofing of the whole property with a modern standing seam profiled roof (including 5 x velux type roof lights), in lieu of brown concrete tiled roof would alter the appearance of the roof scape. However the agents have noted this would be in

• a dark brown colour to mirror the existing colour of concrete roof tiles and would help to blend with the existing properties roof colours in the streetscene.
• 6.4 The agent notes on the design approach that; "The proposed design modernises the property through thoughtful updates that respect and enhance its context. By simplifying the building's mass, updating external finishes, and incorporating contemporary design features, the proposal aims to create a harmonious and high-quality addition to its surroundings" which is unobjectionable.
• 6.5 Other alterations that would alter the appearance of the property would be the change to the external finishes offering a smooth render to replace the existing spar dash. Other external design additions that help create a modern appearance would be powder coated metal rainwater goods, fascia's, soffits and window and door glazing frames in a grey colour. Whilst these are only small details on their own, combined these help create a complete modern appearance to the property rather than an adhoc approach. The existing bay window would be replaced with a larger cantilevered covered porch and a frameless glass corner adding a degree of interest to the front elevation.
• 6.6 The agent notes on the design approach that; "The proposed design modernises the property through thoughtful updates that respect and enhance its context. By simplifying the building's mass, updating external finishes, and incorporating contemporary design features, the proposal aims to create a harmonious and high-quality addition to its surroundings" which is unobjectionable.
• 6.7 The rear elevation would also see a notable change to the first floor level and the roofscape here that would see the replacement of the existing small dormer roof and the installation of a larger rear flat roofed dormer that is taller and longer. The agent notes on this alteration; "The proportions and spacing of window and door framing have been carefully considered to ensure that both new and existing openings are visually integrated into the overall design. Proposed in-line roof lights will seamlessly integrate into the roof and provide vital access to natural light and ventilation to first floor accommodation."
• 6.8 Whilst this dormer would be larger than the existing and the face (windows) would measure a height from the roof plane of approx. 2.0m and 10m long across the width of the roofscape and internally would offer an internal head height of 2.4m. For reference the existing dormer measurers 4m long and 1.5m in height. This massing would be broken up with the use of regular sized window and infill panels that offer a simple and seamless appearance and uniformity twinned with the remaining space above the windows and the surrounding sides of the dormer, the dormer cheeks and roof would be in the same standing seam metal material as the remaining roof scape which helps mitigate the massing. A lesser design of this size and scale without using this method of roof finish / cladding and powder coated metal fascia's, verges, soffits and rain water goods to match the remainder of the roof in the same material; would be a strong reason for refusal as this would create a more prominent visual incongruous feature due to the size and visual appearance, which would be seen contrary to the advice given in the Residential Design Guide.

6.10 Also proposed to the ground floor rear elevation is a subordinate rear patio area measuring approx. 3m wide and 6m long with matching pergola structure and sliding timber screens that open into the gardens area. The principle of a extending at the rear at single storey level is an acceptable form of development for increasing the floor area to the dwellinghouse. - 6.11 The proposed extension above the garage, the rear dormer and the construction of a front porch would be introducing a larger built form and in terms of size and height and the general appearance but it is considered proportionate to the respective front and rear elevation and designed to serve that specific purpose for additional living accommodation.

6.12 When visiting the site and considering the proposals, the views off the front and rear elevation from the adjacent highways would be read within the residential context of the property and surrounding streetscene. When finished in the proposed materials (as noted above) would give a uniform finish throughout the property and helps with the design of modernising a traditional bungalow and making its visual identify more complementary and interesting in an otherwise dull street scene. These design attributes all help to ensure the built form is in keeping with the character and appearance of the dwellinghouse. - 6.13 The installation of the four wall mounted solar panels on the south gable at first floor level, is slightly unconventional and would be mounted flat against the gable and in terms of what is being proposed would be insignificant in terms of the overall proposals. - 6.14 As such, whilst the proposals will make the property unique in the streetscene, the design approach to extend and architecturally led palette of materials to finish the property is on balance, deemed to be just about acceptable form of development in this specific instance, without harming the visual character and quality of the streetscene or to the property itself in accordance with STP3,5, GP2(b,c) and Ep42. NEIGHBOURING AMENITY - 6.15 When considering whether there would be any adverse impact upon (loss of light, overbearing impact upon outlooks and/or overlooking) any of the neighbouring properties from the built form of the extensions and dormer, particularly to the neighbouring properties to the sides (No's 8 & 10) given the approach to extend for its majority above the garage to the south of the property, the extension of the ridge would be closer to No.8 to the south of the site. - 6.16 Considering the relationship and the orientation of the site to that at No.8. Their comments have been taken into consideration and the agents have provided a detailed plan to demonstrate the orientation and configuration of the two properties. A site visit confirmed the No.9 is set further back into the plot and the ridge line of the new roof and bulk of the new rood extension given its pitch would be more towards the rear elevation of no.8. As such and views or outlook from the gable window to no.8 is more biased to looking along the front elevations of the streetscene facing north, rather than to the rear. As such the proposals would not be seen to reduce any light from the gable window to No.8 by reason of the distance between the two properties and their orientation in relation to the street scene. - 6.17 The level and scale of development proposed here, are considered to be relatively modest and not judged to cause harm to the enjoyment of the main dwellinghouse or considered to harm the neighbouring amenity, specifically those to the sides. When viewing the proposed extensions, the rear extension would not be visible from the highway at the front and those views off the front and rear upper extension with dormer would be read in the residential context of the property and surrounding streetscene. On balance, these aspects would be considered to be compliant with those sections of General Policy 2(g).

- 7.0 CONCLUSION

7.1 The development is acceptable in terms of its form, mass and design by having provided suitable additions to an existing residential property. An exception is being made with regards to the size and scale of the dormer, however the overall level of finish in its materials is a convincing argument in this case which carries material weight. As such the proposals would comply with Spatial Policy 2; Strategic Policy 2,3,5; General Policy 2 and Environment Policy 42 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan (2016). The application is therefore recommended for approval. - 8.0 RIGHT TO APPEAL AND RIGHT TO GIVE EVIDENCE

8.1 The Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 sets out the process for determining planning applications (including appeals). It sets out a Right to Appeal

(i.e. to submit an appeal against a planning decision) and a Right to Give Evidence at Appeals (i.e. to participate in an appeal if one is submitted).

8.2 Article A10 sets out that the right to appeal is available to:

• o applicant (in all cases);
• o a Local Authority; Government Department; Manx Utilities; and Manx National Heritage that submit a relevant objection; and
• o any other person who has made an objection that meets specified criteria.

8.3 Article 8(2)(a) requires that in determining an application, the Department must decide who has a right to appeal, in accordance with the criteria set out in article A10. - 8.4 The Order automatically affords the Right to Give Evidence to the following (no determination is required):

• o any appellant or potential appellant (which includes the applicant);
• o the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture, the Department of Infrastructure and the local authority for the area;
• o any other person who has submitted written representations (this can include other Government Departments and Local Authorities); and
• o in the case of a petition, a single representative. _____________________________________________________________________________________________________

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 and that in making this decision the Officer has agreed the recommendation in relation to who should be afforded interested person status, and/or rights to appeal.

Decision Made : Permitted Date : 14.03.2025 Determining Officer

Signed : S BUTLER Stephen Butler Head of Development Management

Customer note This copy of the officer report reflects the content of the office copy and has been produced in this form for the benefit of our online service/customers and archive record.